INDEX

1984

January - December DWTE IN 194

4110TP'ThTS Competition: 362,703 ,ANGLIAN WA AU'iH0RITY Rayleigh Town Centre, Flood Relief Scheme: 136,383,631 704,727,821 Capital Programme 1984/85: 247 Consultation Cojanittees: 300 EIEK) Direotive — Quality of Water 480 ADDIT Interim Audit 1981/82 & 1982/83: 76(32 The Grange, Rayleigh: 76(33 Ebcternal Audit: 271 (2)547(3)(9),771 Report on 1ffective Use of Resources: 773 Council Grounds and Open Spaces: 125 Removal of House Refuse: 346,850 Straw and Stubble — Burning: 347,427,599,851 Tattoolets: 348 Pleasure Grounds: 378,809 CAR PARKING Websters Way: 52,161 ,261,425(16),872 Survey of: 53 Charges: 1 6o Offence — Mr. P. Grove: 200 Back Lane: 275,434,87 Oxford Parade: 425(13 Golden Cross Parade: 425(14) ,833 Replacement of Ticket Machines: 536 Future. Requirements: 537 Market Car Park: 871

CARAVAN SITES Bramblehurst Farm, Canewdon: 109 Halcyon Caravan Park, Hullbridge: 110 Gypsy Caravan Sites: 174(6) Sites for Touring Caravans: 226,726 Crouch Caravan Park, Hullbndge: 345 Caravan Storage: 397 Land Adj. Rectory Avenue, Hawkwell: 479,717 Site Licence No. 19 — Transfer: 6oo Land Adj. Clifton Road, Ashangdon: 605 Distances between Caravans: 721 - Review of Site Licences: 852 - Site Licence Conditions: 861-

CHARGES :Equipment Hur& (Sports): 124,489,542 Car Parking: 160 Sports Centre Vending Machines: 223,263 Clements Hall: 234,263 Hire of Playing Fields: 227,263 Recreation Grounds - Charges: 801 CIflYIENTS HALL LEISURE CENTRE Sports Goods Franchise: 82,91,729 Snooker Exhibition: 132 Phase IV: 234,240,370, 371,425(4), 626 flower Arranging Festival 1986: 174,361 Advertising: 372 Second Access: 431 ,443,564, 567,675,783,830 Climbing Wall: 490,542 Licensed Bar: 728 Spencers Nursery — Use of: 807,922 Exclusive Use Of Pool By Disabled Perm': 814 Health Education in Workplace: 874 COMMITTM]S - PANELS OF Joint Staff and Safety: 55,409,771,880 Appeals Panel: 56 Rayligh Grange: 62,405,528 Chairman's 76,174,271,425,547.669,771,893 Audit: 76,174271,547, 669 771, 093 Hackney Carriage: 137,290 Joint Works & Safety: 168,258,771 UMinning: 174,669 Community Centres: 271 District Plan Working Party: 425 (5 ) , 516

Contd. . . . . ¶j'F "fl • 'w rr '

— imms o (C0N!rD.....)

Music and. Dancing: 558,596 Rayleigh Consultative: 658 Dutch Cottage Management: 893 Rate Consultation: 393

COMMITTEES and EXPORTS OP Rayleigh Consultative and. Liaison: 181 Appointment of Standing Committees: 311,559 Appointment of Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of Committees and Panels of Committees: 312 COMMUNITY CERTITh2S Rayleigh Grange: 39,236,612,613,799,800,897 freight House: 121, 179,232,369,493,815 Great Wakering: 271(2),426,7898 CQ1PULSCRY IMPR0TE2ENT See: UNFIT HOUSES COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDERS Clementa Hall (Second Access): 443 Grange Village, Rayleigh: 443 Lancaster Road, Rayleigh; 496 COMPUTERS - USE OF Computerisation of Land Charges: 883 Computer Development: 899 CONFERENCES Recreation Management: 225 Essex Business Exhibition, Basildon: 274 C.I.P.F.A: 554 Association of District Councils: 680 CONSERVATION GRANTS Expenditure 1984/85: 4 Hochford Hall Barns: 182 CON!IERACTS Hardwick House, Rayleigh (lois) 13 Oxford Parade Car Parking, Ashingdon Road: 71 Castle Hall, Rayleigh: 122,233,238 Tender Opening: 174(3 Standing Orders: 174(5 Wheeled Bin Scheme: 216 Clements Hall — Phase TV: 240 Day Centre, Back Lane, Rochford: 291,421,906 Spa Court Lift Installation: 339,476,674,722 Repainting and Repairs, Gt.Wakering (1047): 355 Window Replacements, Essex Close (ioi): 355 Painting and Redecorating, Rayleigh (1048): 420 Housing at Pearsons Farm: 438,446 Painting — Little Wheatleys Estate (1050): 481 Goose Cottages, 5/22 Essex Close and Stambridgo Road (1057): 461 Replacement of Wooden Windows (1058): 431 Replace Central Heating Boilers (1056): 593 Bntton Court (Extension)(1O1O): 660,691,347,863 Contd CONTRACTS (CONT .)

Resurface Freight House Car Park 815 Land adjoining 64 Nelson Road, Rayleigh 836 Replacement of Windows (Contract 1080): 848 Invitation to Quote (Contract 1084 — Cleaning of Public Conveniences): 849 Supply of Black Refuse Sacks: 888

CONTRAVENTIONS See 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING - CONTRAVENTIONS'

COUNCI LLORS Mrs. P. Hawke: 77 P.J. Himfen - Resignation: 197 M.CL. Warner — Resignation: 197 A.L. Tate 288 t!Teach_Intl for new Members: 551 Role of Councillors in the Planning System: 642 Representative — Essex L.A. Supplies Consortium; 776

COUNCIL PROPERTY, PREMISES Selecting Contractors: 15 Painting Programme: 16 Function Catering: 40, 368 Rayleigh Civic Suite: 51, 539 Rayleigh Grange: 62, 84, q4 118 High Street, Great Wakering: 111, 336 Cleaning Staff: 167 Castle Hall, Rayleigh: 239, 271 (2) Commercial Sales: 369 Playing Fields: 487 Ashingdon Playing Fields: 501 , 804 C.E.D.A.R. Centre, Rayleigh: 543 Hockley Public Hall: 549 Gardens, Rochford Offices: 625 Betts Farm Estate, Hockley: 639 Fairview Playing Field, Rayleigh: 640, 704 Dutch Cottage, Rayleigh: 669 Freight House — Conservation Award: 702 Highmead Court, Rayleigh: 743 Rochford Depot — Central Store: 778 Hockley Primary School — Playing Field: 806 Day Centre, Rochford: 906

CRIME PREVENTION: 11 Glue Sniffing — Legislation: 199, 555, 854

CROUCH HARBOUR ACT 1974: 177, 199 DEEMED PLANNING CONSENTS Land Adjacent 64 Nelson Road, Rayleigh: 33, 320, 380 Great Wakering Playing Field: 99, 119, 443 Clements flail Playing Field: 99, 119 Rochford Information Technology Centre: 99, 176 A.P. Flats, Bramerton Road, Hockley: 99, 113 Market, Pooles Lane Car Park, Hulibriclge: 99, 155 Freight House, Rochford: 186, 199, 567, 610 A.P. Flats, Britton Court, Rayleigh: 320 Temporary Car Park, Grove Road, Rayleigh: 320, 380 Spa Court: 339, 763, 839 Britton Court, Rayleigh: 351 Back Lane, Rochford: 434 5 Wymarc Crescent, Rayleigh: 482, 700, 719 Spencers Nursery Site; 491 Turret House Farm, Rayleigh: 498, 732 Mill Hall, Rayleigh: 567, 610 312 Rectory Road, Rawkwell: 567 Clements I-Tall — Second Access: 675 Rawreth Playing Fields, Rawreth Lane: 763, 798 North Street, Great Wakering: 765 Purdeys Industrial Estate: 770 Rochford Depot - Central Store: 778

DELEGATION SCHEME Access to Council Property: 523

I ELECTIONS District Council: 429, 678 Register of Electors — Prosecutions: 679

EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES See ROCHFORD ENTERPRISE MANPOWER SERVICES COMMISSION

ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL Essex County Bill: 175, 514, 677, 704, 774 Coastal Protection Plan: 517 Womeris Aid Refuges: 853

ESTIMATES I Capital Programme 1984/5 4, 12, 37, 47, 69 80, 179, 435, 556, 673 Mill Hall Development: 36 Street Lighting: 417 Day Centre, Rochford: 421 The Drive and The Walk, Hullbridge: 636 Summer Play Schemes: 655 MEC Mobile Patrol Transport: 655 Architectural and Engineering: 688 FOOWAPHS No. 10 Canewdon: 243, 392 Essex Bill — Establishment of new Footpaths: 514 No. 10 Hockley: 635, 829 Footpath 23 (Ualwkwell): 830

PUI?AL ARRANGB!J}1NTS Mrs LL. Sampson: 350 GRABP MID LOAN REQUESTS Grant Aid to Outside Bodies: 49, 869 Rayleigh Grange Association: 39 Mr M. Smith (Athlete): 222, 263 Christmas Lighting - Rochi'ord Parish Council: 651 Assistance towards Litigation Costs: 870 GYPSIES 619, 699, 704, 746, 823, 907, 922 HACKNEY OMtRIAGES See also COMNITPEES Thorease in Pares 137(4), 173, 253, 290 Terms of Reference: 137 1 Licence Fees: 137 3 Plate No. 28: 137 2 Consultation Paper: 637

B1P.ATTH and SM'ETY Storage of Liquified Petroleum Gazes: 18 Noise Nuisance, 34/36 High Street, Great Wakering: 601

HIGHWAYS See also ThABTIC REGULATION ORDERS

General: 61, 64, 75, 91, 736, 831 Street Lighting: 61, 390, 417 The Drive and The Walk, Hulibridge: 66, 391, 636 Road Safety Review: 72, 140 Consultations with Essex County Council: 245 Consultation dttafts — Transport Policy 1985/86: 249 Heavy Lorry Routes: 254 B1013 —Access to Southend: 301, 389, 529, 638, 670, 704 Eastwood Road Improvements: 507 Ashingdon Park Estate: 507 Bramerton Road, Hockley: 508 South Fambridge Works: 510 Rayleigh Downs Road, Rayleigh: 644

HOUSING See: IWROVIIHffiNT GRANTS TJNPIT HOUSES MUNICIPAL HOUSING HOUSING BENEFITS HOUSE PURCHASE LOANS

Protection from Eviction: 353 Housing Strategy: 354 Housing and Building Control Act 1984: 592, 711

HOUSING BENEFITS General: 105 Benefits Review: 756

HOUSE PURCHASE LOANS Case 2786F: 24, 115 General: 103 Mortgage Interest Rate: 104 IMPROT4EMT GRANTS (:ousING) Capital Programme 1984/85: 12 Roof Insulation 14, 591 4 Russell Row, Canewdon: 26 King Georgets Close, Rayleigh: 478 2 Russell Row, Canewdon: 588 17 Queen flizabeth Chase, Roohford: 589 KEEP BRITAIN TIDY Report: 208, 840 Sponsored Litter Bins: 856 LAND Albert Road and Alexandra Road, Rayleigh: 6 Land adjacent to64 Nelson Road, Rayleigh; 55, 581, 661, 836 Land South of Woodlands Road, ilockley: 67 flaws Heath Allotment Site: 68 Land H/C Council Offices, Rochford: 81, 91 Kingley Wood: 126 Land between Rawreth and London Road, Rayleigh: 144, 193, 395 Land between Ethelbert and Tilverston Road: 146 Land between 108—110 High Street, Great Wakering: 251 Land adj. 21 London Hill, Rayleigh: 252, 744 Land at Bedloes Corner: 399, 497, 518 Land adj. Smuggler's Den, Hullbridge: 401 Land adj. 181 Rochford Garden Way: 402 Hambro Hill, Rayleigh: 425(6) Council's Land Requirements — Next 10 Years: 634, 671 t2unett House Farm and. Plumberow Avenue: 618 Purdeys Industrial Estate: 741 Land opp. Cagefield Road, Stambndge: 605 Play area - Cavershwn Parkmanns Way: 624 Land H/C 36 Pulpits Close, Hockley: e6o LEISURE FACILITIES Grove Road Open Space: 30, 31, 91, 127, 230, 373, 495 Rochford Pair: 34, 78, 91, 816 Wheelers Cycling Club: 35, 616 Tennis Centre, Temple Farm Industrial Estate, Southend: 98, 282 Indoor Bowls Centre Petition: 123, 231, 492 Equipment Hire Charges: 124 Kingley Wood, Rayleigh: 126 Hockley Woods: 128, 376,385, 499, 620, 621, 740 Inter-Ward Sports Competition: 129 Will�VIC Arts Week: 130, 63 Leisure Bus: 131 Rayleigh Mayday Fair; 145 Soap Box Derby: 261 Eastern Counoil for Sport and Recreation: 224, 731, 797 Playing Fields for Football Coaching: 227 Members and Officers Keep—Pit: 276 Essex Games Management: 271, 608, 669 Photographic Competition: 362 Allotment Competition: 364 Festival of Sport: 366, 486 Summer Play Scheme: 367, 617 Circuses: 374, 424 Cbildrens Playgrotind: 375 Rawreth Playing Field: 377 Future Land Requirements—Recreation: 500 Martin Girvan; 503 Tony Bishop: 504 St. John Fisher Playing Field: 627 Caravan Rally: 726 Recreation Grounds — Charges: 801 Gb. Wakering Recreation Ground: 802, 803 Asblrigdon P1ayinPield - BNX Track: 804 Spenoers Nursery: 807 Cleinents Hall — Use of Pool by Disabled Persons: 814 Rochford Show 1985: 818 Health Education in Workplace 874

LICENCES and LEASBS See also LAN]

Daws Heath Allotment Site: 68 118 High Street, Great Wakering: 111 Brocklands Gardens, Rayleigh: 133 Rochford Fire Station, South Street: 147 The Pitt Toothbrush, Rayleigh: 217, 597 Fish Ponds, Fendale Road, Rayleigh: 228 Crouch Caravan Park, Hulibridge: 345 Ashingdon Mcwiorial Hall: 379 Access to Council Property: 523 301 Ferry Road, Hullbridge: 525 ¶Purrett House Fan and Pluntberow Mount: 618 Garage in Quys Lane: 825

LISTEII)BUILDINGS (HISToRIc) Campaign for Registration: 284 Grant Aid: 557 MANPO SERVICES COMMISSION Roohford ITS: 44, 45

Community Programme: 63(3), 134, 168, 258(40), 272, 780, 902

Review of Thiployment Services 553, 900

ITS Workshop: 901

MABEETS Pooles Lane Car Park, Hallbridge: 83, 548

MSLLS ON W}HBII15 Rayleigh Meals on 1wheels: 885

MILL HALL Pu.ture Development, Estimates: 36 SJiIEVIC Arts Week: 130

MUNICIPAL HOUSING - 118 Housing Investment Programme: 106, 107 Britton Court, Rayleigh: 108, 218, 660, 691, 847, 863 Playing field site Great Wakering: 271(2) "Bell House", High Street, Gteat Wakering: 713, 775

MUNICIPAL HOUSING - GENERAL Rent Arrears: 11, 105, 212, 332, 472, 586, 843 L.A. Mortgage Interest Rates: 104, 471 House Renovation Grants: 107, 590 Housing for Mentally Handioapped: 116, 335, 443, 844 Lift Pembroke House: 214 D.O.E. Ciroular on Land for Housing/Green Belts: 248 Claim for Damages — Little \?dheatleys Estate: 267 Letting: 333 Housing Waiting Lists: 334 Rousing Investment Programme: 474 Housing and Building Control Aot 1984: 711 Painting to Counoil Dwellings 1985/86: 712 Homes for Er—mental Patients: 857

MUNICIPAL HOUSING - INI)]!VIDUAL 14 St. John's Road, Great Wakering: 338 Tenanoy No. 9236: 603 Tenancy No. 8381: 604 36 Pulpits Close, Hookley: 860

MUNICIPAL HOUSING - SALES 17 and 19 Southend Road, Roehford: 262 Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell: 271, 340, 419 Contributions Towards Legal Costs: 846 OUTSIDE BODIES Subscriptions 1984/85; 48 Grant Aid: 49 Southend Health Council: 77, 178, 428 Grove Junior and Infants School: 178 Rochford. Port Health Authority: 207 Appointment of Representatives: 314, 315, 428, 896 N.E. Thames Regional Health Authority: 343 Essex Local Authorities Supplies Consortium: 776 National Housing and Town Planning Council: 777 Rayleigh Consultative Committee: 894 Rayleigh Chamber of Thads and Commerce: 895 PARKS SPORTS CENTRE Licensed, Bar: 38 Future Operations: 494, 811 Colf Practising Machine: 502, 725

PLMINING See TOIdN and COUNTRY PLAENTNG

PUBLIC CONVNIENCE Cleaning of: 849

PUBLIC 1ThALTR Piping of Ditches: 209 Straw Burning: 19, 599 Suspected Case of Anthrax: 574, 606 Castle Joiners, 34/36 High Street, Great Wakening: 718 Glue Sniffing — Legialation: 199, 555

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE Great Wakening: 32, 75, 375, 802 Brocklands Open Space: 41 Bye—Laws: 125 Hullbnidge Foreshore: 229 Plumberow Avenue: 400 Cagefield Road, Stambridge; 403 Pluxnberow Nount(N.A.F.P.): 425(8) Spencers Nursery: 491, 542, 807 Lancaster Road, Rayleigh: 496 Turret 'House Fan, Rayleigh: 498, 808 Seaview Drive, Great Wakening: 526 Land Acquisition — Turret Rouse Farm and Plum'berow Mount: 618, 732 Security: 622 Hockley Primary School - Playing Field: 806 RATES - GENEELAI District Rate 1984/85: 152, 169, 170 Irrecoverable Items 1983/84: 534 Consult at ions with Commercial Bate payers: 672 Rates Act 1984: 751 Rating and. Valuation Association Conference: 752 Discount for Prompt Payment of: 867 District Rate 1985/86: 904, 922 RATE U5JIEF Charities: 50, 158, 535 Bock ]Jene Church Committee: 650 Hockley Pu.blic Hall: 750 Charitable and other Organisations: 868, 887

RAYLEIGH, PARISH STATUS: 79

RAYLEIGH CONSERVATION .ABEA Removal of Telephone Pole, High Street, Rayleigh: 65

RII[B'USE COLLECTION and DISPOSAL Save—a—Can Scheme: 20 Wheeled Bin Scheme: 112, 216, 263, 585, 704 Sponsored Litter Bins: 856 Wheeled Bin Cleansing Service: 858

RIGHTS OF WAY Rear of 52 Rochefort Drive, Rochford: 594 Maintenance of: 826

ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION ZONE Community Programme: 63(5), 134 Grove Road Woodland Management: 63 4 Verges: 63 7 Waters Edge Campaign: 6 5 Countryside Week: 356, 385 Report: 385, 512, 738 Countryside Commission — Grants: 513, 542, 556, 739

ROCEFOR]) ENTERPRISE R.I.P.A. — Hay Competition: C—View: 430, 552 Loan to Matchbox Toys: 444 &hibitions Working Party: 669(6)

ROCEPORD INFORMATION TECENOLOGY CENTFtE(I. T.E.C.) Use of Hockley School: 149, 273, 277, 289, 433, 540

781, 903 SEWERS See also SURFACE WATER

Poyttens/Spring Garden: 250 Provision of Foul Water Sewage: 404

SOtflMUTh AIRPORT: 550

SOUTEEiND IIF1LLTH ATJThORITY: 342, 598 Family Practitioner Committees: 681 Operational Plans 1985/87: 842

SPORT See LEISURE PACILITIFS

STAFF - ASP.T. and C. Post 1114: 57 supervisor(L. S. ): 58 Removal Expenses for Residential Wardens: 165 Sports Centre Manager: 235 I.T.E.C. Manager; 271, 425 Community Doctors: 344 S.E.E.cII.E.C. Superannuation Scheme; 415 Staffing Review - Planning and Leisure: 439, 656 Chief Officers — Conditions of Service: 440, 657, 784 Principal Assistant — Leisure: 560 Wardens - Wedgeiood Court: 654 Computer Directorate — Staffing: 686 Recreation Supervisor: Clements Hall: 689 Staffing — Finance Directorate: 758 Assistant Director Architecture: 759 Structural Engineer: 759

— GaThiRAL Authority to enter land: 3, 148 Appeals Panel: 56 Accomri4dation: 55(2), 409(5 Car Allowance Review: 55(3), 162, 409(6 Management Restructuring: 88, 95, 687, 757 Authority to Recover Rates: 159 Authority to Prosecute Car Parking Offences: 159 Staff Car Parking - Back Lane, Rochford: 275, 409(4) Racial Equality — Code of Practice: 416 Secondary lThBployment: 409(2) Honorary Examiner(Mr Stanford): 684 Presentation of Paper(Chief Executive): 685 Secretaries — Academie de Nontpellier: 753 Christmas Leave: 772 Report on Effective use of Resources: 773 Manpower Statement: 878 Staff Vacancies: 879 Two Month Dilbargo on Post Filling: 880 National Scheme of Conditions of Service: 881 D.T.P. — Revised Management Structure: 759, 882 Chief Officers Conditions of Servioe: 910, 924 - 1IAMLAL Cleaning Staff, Council Offices: 167 Staff Review — Leisure: 439 CA 23 — Premature Retirement: 541 DL 7 — Premature Retirement: 541

STMFDNG OIWERS ,ànien&nents to Financial 3.0.: 690

S!EREFT NAJ4IbTG Victoria Road, Rayleigh: 393, 511 Wedgewood Way, Ashingdon: 632 Development at Spencers Nurseries: 827

STREET TRADDIG: 349

SURFACE WATER See also SEJEB2 Rayleigh flood Relief Programme: 138, 383, 704, 727, 821 Kingsmans Pa Ditch; 139 Razreth Lane area: 246, 641 Poyntens/Spring Garden: 250 TO14N and COUNTRY PILAENING See also: CONSERVATION GRANTS R.V.C.Z. T & O.P. CONTI?AYENTIONS

Land r/o Council Offices, Rochford: 81, 91, 191 A.P flats, Braxuerton Road, Hockley: 99, 113, 714, 908 D.O.E. Circular on Planning Applications: 142, 180, 185 Rankins Fans - Development: 174 Acacia House, Rocthford: 184 The Rose Garden, Hockley: 187, 296 Comet Warehouse, Rayleigh: 194 Painbridge Works, South Panbrid.ge: 202, 289, 398, 510, 542 D.O.E. Ciroular on Land for Housing/Green Belts: 248 County Consultation draft — Transport Policy and Prograninies 1985/86: 249 Joint Housing Land Availability -. Study Group: 255, 270 Hotel — Locks Hifl, Roohford: 279, 434, 454 Houses, The Gattens, Rayleigh: 283 Booseys Nursery, Southend Road, Roohford: 293 Reliance Fan, Hullbridge Road, Rayleigh: 294 "TreehurstT' 28 Western Road, Rayleigh: 297 Land South of 66 Woodlands Road, Hockley: 304 Roohford. Telephone Exchange: 327, 425(9) N25 - Land Use Planning: 396 Grange Village, Rayleigh: 432, 443 Plots 1 to 9, Princess Gardens, Roohford: 450 29 to 49, Juableside Gardens, Hullbridge: 451 Land r/o The Beeohes, Western Road, Rayleigh: 457 296 Ask'ingdon Road, Iloohford: 458 Railway Goods Yard, Crown Hill, Rayleigh: 461 Rectory Farm, Fambridge Road, South Fambridge: 463 "Tinkers Field't, Hullbridge Road, Rayleigh: 465 Nurseries/Garden Centres — Policy: 520 Programme of Works (1Ingineering): 527, 832 Rawreth Industrial Estate: 582 Swimming Pool Covers: 577, 643 Draft District Local Plan: 664, 665, 704, 705 Scout Hall, Ark Lane, Roohford: 699 Tipping — Barling Hall, Barling: 716 Purdeys Industrial Estate: 741, 770 Power Plant, Basildon: 745 Land r/o 5 Fountain Lane, Hookley: 762 Orchard View, Wakering Road, Southend: 767 Town & County Planning, Basildon: 918

T01)N and COUNTRY PLANNTh& - CONThAVENTIONS Ribbonsdale Nursery, Rayleigh: 5 Shangri—La West Caravan Site, Hullbridge: 25, 151 25—29 West Street, Roohford: 299 Barling House, Barling Road, Little Wakering: 322 83 Alexandra Road, Great Wakering: 462 31A Seaview Drive, Great Wakering: 462 57 High Street, Rayleigh: 462 25 Abbey Road, Hullbridge: 462, 694 72 High Road, Hullbridge: 467 Lfllyville, Burlington Gardens, HuJibridge: 569 1 to 7 Timberwharf Cottages, Battlesbridge: 570 Rawreth Garage, Chelmaford Road; 571 Green, Rayleigh: 3 Warwick L 577, 643 Carport, adj to"Carpautexs Azins" gthrage, Rawreth: 578 493 Little Wakering Road, Barling: 579 54 Main Road., Hockley: 695 65 Coldsworbhy Drive, Great Wakering: 791, 917 Ricbra, Lower Road, Hockley: 912 Rayleigh Indoor Market, 89 High Street: 913 Land North of Little Wheatleys Chase: 914 Newhall Farm, Lower Road, Hockley: 220 TOURISM Development of: 365, 730 Salon IDe Gastromie — Brugges; 683 Rochford Railway Station: 742

TRAEPIC EGD1ATION ORDERS See also HIGHWAYS

Eastwood Road Crossing: 61, 75, 91 Hulibridge Road/Rawreth Lane junction: 61, 75, 91, 189, 507, 736 Heavy Lorry Routes: 143, 254 Hambro Parade, Rayleigh: 189 Nortimer Road, Rayleigh: 189 Various Highway/Traffic Matters(See Report): 245, 386, 387, 831 Rayleigh Traffic Experiment: 387, 835 Purdeys Industrial Estate: 388 Junction Plumberow Avenue/Greensward Lane: 406, 737 Oxford Parade, Ashingdon: 509, 834 High Street, Rayleigh: 530, 645 Prohibition & Restriction of Waiting Orders: 828

¶L'R'gE]S Tree Preservation Orders: 148 Land South of 66 Woodlands Road, Hockley: 326 Beolcuey Wood: 524 Land adjacent AWA Depot, Creeksea Road, Canewdon(T.P.O. 6/83): 693

TWINNING - Report: 174(1 Haltern Visit: 174(1 Burgermeister of Haltern — Council Visit: 706 TJNYIP IIOUSES 3 Russell Bow, Canewdon: 22 Policy: 85 49 St. Jobnts Road, Great Wakering: 337, 477 2 Russell Row, (Janewdon: 841

UNTIDY SITES Land junction of Grove Road/Trinity Road, Rayleigh: 321 Statutory Powers: 519 VEETOLES and. PLANT Replacement mind: 54 Wheeled Bin. Lifting System: 263, 875 Photocopier — Old House: 412 Replacement of Oar Park Ticket Machines: 536 Sale of Surplus Plant: 538, 877 Refuse Vehicles — Maintenance: 755 Replacement of Motor Mower: 876 Reversing Accidents Involving Refuse Vehicles: 884

V]]CEFIENTS TV (AN01mT) Kingamans Pam Ditch Scheme(3,OOO): 139 Rayleigh Flood Relief Scheme(€2,400): 138 Freight House(€3,000): 156 Salaries and Wages(Health and Housing)(6,7oo & £7,900): 211, 263 Housing Revenue Account(1138,000 & £229,000): 211, 263 Members' Express/salaries and Wages(3,80O): 260 Concessionary Fares(2, 300): 260 0tr Park Pees/Websters Way and Approach(Z6, 500): 260 Printing, Stationary and Advertising (Finance Department) (7,000): 260 Wheeled Bin Lifting System(6,400): 263 Leisure Services (fl7,400): 263 WAflIRDTG SPORTS CENThE Extension: 271(2), 810 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL MINUTES

1984

April ROCFIFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

Minutes of the Policy and Resources Committee

At a meeting held on 3rd4tril, 1984. Present: Councillors A.J. Harvey (Chairman), M.N. Anderson, Mrs. L.N.A. Campbell— Daley, Mrs. P. Cooke, tiC. Cope) LA. Crick, T. Fawell, R.D. Foster, J.A. Gibson, Mrs J0 Jones, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, J.E. Nokes, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, C. Stephenson, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor and D.C. Wood.

Ayologies: Councillors Mrs. E.M. Heath and T.J. Penner.

V!cn: Councillors LB. Daley, Mrs. P.R. Hawke and DR. Helson.

268. MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 6th March 1984 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

269. MONITORING OP PERFORMANCE

(a) Poliqy and Resources Committee—Meetings of 8th November 1983 and 24th January 1984

j)Counci1 — Meetings of 15th November 1983 and 31st January 1984.

The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken.

The Chairman reported that detailed plans had now been received from the developers for the Lodge Close Site, Rayleigh and the planning application would now come before Planning Services Committee for determination.

Minutes 747/83, 83/84 and 88/84 were carried forward. (21210)

270. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

The Committee received the following Minutes:—

Committee Date Minute Moe.

Health & Housing Services 20th March 203 — 218 Leisure Services 22nd March 219 — 240 Development Services 27th March 241 — 255

The Chairman of the Development Services Committee stated that Minute 255 was inaccurate and asked that it be deleted and the following Minute substituted therefor:—

000420 255. S.C.L.S.E.R.P. (standin& Conference for London and South East Regional Planning) Officers Support Groqp

The Director of Town Planning reported on re—organisation of the constitution of the above Standing Conference and advised that in addition to the Members of the Region nominated from the Constituent Authorities, an Officers Support Group on which there would be five District Council places would be established.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Town Planning be nominated to serveon the Officers Support Croup.'

RECOMMENDED That the Development Services Committee Minutes be amended accordingly.

Finance & Personnel 28th March 256 — 267

271. PANEL REPORTS

RECOMMENDED That the following appended reports and the recommendations contained therein be adopted.

Panel Date Recommendations In Paragraphs Numbered

Essex Games 27th February 2,3,6. Chairman's Panel 15th March 2,4,6,9.

The Chairman indicated that there had been discussion at the Chairman's Panel as indicated in paragraph 1 but that the report should also have included the Panel's decision as follows:—

"9. Council Properties, Sweyne Avenue, Hawkwell

The Panel considered the disposal of the three Council owned properties in Sweyne Avenue to offset the cost of the second access to Clements Hall.

RECOMMENDED That the Solicitor to the Council, in consultation with the Director of Health and Housing, be authorised to sell the above thre properties with vacant possession at the District Valuer's valuation."

RECOMMENDED That the above paragraph 9 be added to the report of the Chairman's Panel. (225)(SOL and DHH)

ITEC Appointment Panel 16th March

The Chairman mentioned that a further Meeting of the Appointments Panel would be held immediately after the Committee. . 000421 Audit Panel 21st March 5 Community Centres Panel 29th March 2

The Committee noted that the Great Wakering Parish Council were most appreciative of the courtesy which had been extended to them by the Panel in visiting the site and the subsequent Meeting.

272. COMMUNITY PROGRAMME 1984/85

The Committee considered the appended report of the Secretary to the Council on the projects which had been approved by the MSC for the second year Community Programme Agency.

They also considered a suggestion from the Chief Executive that at an appropriate time it might be possible to introduce into the Programme the compilation of a comprehensive written history of the District as a whole which would accord with the Council's wish to develop tourism.

A Member mentioned that there were very few picture postcard8 available which illustrated places of interest within the area and suggested that Officers should explore the possibility of producing postcards which could be made available for sale at special events.

RECOMMENDED (1) That the Council makes representation, through the Essex Branch of the Association of District Councils, to the Manpower Services Commission, to increase the number of Community Programme places allocated to Essex.

(2) That the Officers continue to negotiate with the MSC's Area Office to increase the Council's allocation of Community Programme places.

(3) That the Chief Executive makes enquiries of the MSC regarding the compilation of a comprehensive written history of the District and a further report be made in due course.

(4) That Officers explore the possibility of producing local postcards for sale at special events. (7l52)(MT)

273. PUBLIC MEETING — 20TH MARCH1984 PROPOSALS FOR THE USE OF THE FORMER HOCKTJEY COUNTY PRIMARY SCHOOL LAND AND BUILDINGS

The Committee considered the appended report of the Chief Executive regarding the above Meeting.

RECOMMENDED That the Chairmen of Policy and Resources and Development Services Committees be authorised to meet the Action Committee. (7767)(CE & SEC)

S 000422 274. THE ESSEX BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY EXHIBITION, FESTIVAL HALL, BASILDON — 25TH TO 28TH MARCH, 1984

The Chief Executive reported that the Council's recent successful participation in this Exhibition had been well patronised by Rochford—based enterprises and it was considered to be advantageous to participate similarly in the forthcoming Essex Show.

RECOMMENDED That the foregoing proposal be approved. (194) (CE & DTP)

275. STAFF CAR PARKING — BACK LANE, R0CHFORD

The Chief Executive reported that the development of the Doctors' Surgery and the replacement Old People's Day Centre and new Citizens Advice Bureau on the flack Lane Car Park would reduce substantially the number of car parking spaces available to staff.

The Joint Staff and Safety Panel had considered this matter at their Meeting on 26th March and were proposing that staff so displaced should be granted permits to use the Back Lane Car Park and that, when the opportunity presented itself, it would be beneficial to amend the Car Parking Order to include the remaining staff car parking area to enable the public to park nearer the Town Centre facilities. This would mean that further permits would have to be granted to the staff then affected. It was noted that the permits would only be valid on week—days and for the Back Lane Car Park.

RECOMMENDED (1) That those staff who have regularly used their cars for work and are being displaced from the staff car parking area as a consequence of the above projects, be granted permits to use the Back Lane Car Park only and that occasional parking by staff requires specific approval in advance.

(2) That at the appropriate time the Car Parking Order be amended to include the remaining staff car parking area with permits being granted to the staff then displaced.(432l)(CE & SOL)

276. MEMBERS AND OFFICERS KEEP—FIT CLASSES

The Chairman suggested that Members and Officers might wish to attend fitness classes at Clements Hall on Monday and Wednesday evenings commencing at about 9.30 p.m., the usual fees for the hire of the facilities being payable. He asked that any person interested in participating should advise the Director of Leisure so that a decision could be made as to whether there were sufficient numbers.

RECOMMENDED That a further report be made in due course. (231)(DL) I tOOO44a 277. SOUTH EAST ESSEX INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CENTRE (ITEC) (Minute 862/83)

The Director of Finance reported that the MSC Area Manpower Board had confirmed that the Council's application for the Rochford ITEC had been approved subject to obtaining a lease from the County Council for the use of the main building of the former Hockley County Primary School and agreement of the final costings. Details of the lease were now being agreed with the County Of ficers.

Particulars had already been reported of the budget provision for the first three years and the only amendment to the previous figures was the need to raise a ioan to finance the necessary building alterations which were estimated at £20,000.

RECOMMENDED That the revised budget and loan arrangements as reported by the Director of Finance be approved. (9l7)(DF & S OL)

278. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

Resolved that, in accordance with Section 1(2) of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960, the public be now excluded from the meeting for the reason that publicity would be prejudicial to the public interest, the business about to be discussed being the subject of confidential reports.

279. PROPOSED HOTEL — LOCKS HILL SITE (Minute 856/83)

The Chief Executive and Director of Town Planning reported in confidence on negotiations which had taken place to sell part of the Back Lane Car Park fronting Bradley Way for the construction of an hotel for a leading restaurateur in the Town.

The Committee were reminded that the earlier proposals for the sale of land at Locks Hill to MBC (Builders — Ashingdon) Limited provided for an hotel site but that this area had been excluded from the transaction because no assurances could be given as to whether the development would actually take place.

The current proposal was £ or an hotel of 17 bedrooms with a large restaurant, function and conference room, and certain on—site car parking. Access would be from Back Lane. It was hoped that the functions rooms at the Freight House could be utilised in association with the hotel accommodation. The intention was to retain the pedestrian access from the Car Park to Bradley Way, the green and shrubs along the car park frontage and the wooded area by the stream. Part of the Council's land adjacent to the Back Lane Car Park to the north east would be given for pubiic parking use in exchange for the land sold for the hotel. Some re—arrangement of the car park drainage was thought to be necessary.

D9424 pr—n

The Developers were anxious to conclude the transaction and were hoping to start building work in September. They were wanting to issue press statements later in the week about their plans and the Committee were therefore asked to confirm whether the proposal commended itself. The terms agreed for the sale of the land were acceptable to the District Valuer.

The Committee welcomed the scheme with enthusiasm, subject to the usual planning considerations. Members felt that it was desirable to retain as much public car parking as possible consistent with the scheme proceeding.

RECOMMENDED That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to sell an area of land on the Bradley Way frontage of the Back Lane Car Park at the figure approved by the District Valuer. (l5O75)(CE,DTP & SOL)

.

000425 AGENDA ITEM 6 ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

POLICY & RESOURCES COMMITTEE — 3RD APRIL 1984

REPORT OF THE ESSEX GAMES MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

At a meeting held on 27th Present: Councillors Mrs. J.M. Munson (Chairman), J.A. Gibson, A.J. Harvey, Mrs. Jo Jones, Miss B.G..J. Lovett and B. Taylor.

Present representingjthchford and District Sports Council:

Messrs. G. Bailey, A. flay, B. Ward and Mrs. N. Bailey.

1. MINUTES

The report of the meeting held on 11th October 1983 was approved as a correct record.

2. MATTERS ARISING

Further to paragraph 10 (Communications) the Director of Leisure reported that most of the venues to be used for the events in the Games would have telephone facilities available and that for those few that did not, a Council vehicle equipped with a radio would be available.

A Sports Council Representative mentioned that British Telecom might assist with temporary communication facilities and public address systems. it was noted that the Council's C— VIEW system would be used on the day to keep the public informed of results.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure contact British Telecom accordingly.

3. EVENTS AND VENUES

The Committee noted the schedule of sports and venues which had been agreed with the organisers of the District Sports Councils in Essex.

The Director of Leisure reported that the Bowls event would be for ladies teams only and that this proposal had not found much support with the other Districts. Over the past ten years of the Games, the Bowls had been a men's event and the Director considered that it was time that the ladies had the opportunity to play. It was not possible to have a men's competition at the same venue, a further venue was not considered appropriate and a joint scoring arrangement between the ladies and men's competitions to obtain an overall result was not favoured.

RECOMMENDED That the Bowls remains as a ladies only team event.

000426 4. CIVIC RECEPTION

The Committee whilst in the main following the guest list adopted by Brentwood for the 1983 Games, were mindful that with so many Districts participating strict control was necessary over the numbers attending. It was agreed to limit the invitation list to 200 with the Council being represented by the Management Committee only and the Officers serving it. The local NJ'. and the Lord Lieutenant would also be invited.

The Director of Leisure was asked to ascertain whether the Regional Sports Council wished to be represented and to invite representatives of those firms who had sponsored Rochford Leisure events in the past and British Telecom.

5. STAFFING

The Director of Leisure reported that the organisation of the Games would be dealt with in—house with extra support from other Leisure Services staff being drawn in as the workload increased.

It was noted that the Sports Council would be represented at each event in addition to the Council Off icer responsible.

The Director of Leisure proposed to hold a further meeting with the organisers of the different sports after the County Management Committee in March.

6. ESTIMATE PROVISION

The Committee noted that the District Council's Revenue Budget provided for expenditure of £10,000 on the Games although it was hoped to obtain some sponsorship monies. The Committee decided, in view of the difficult decisions taken over the budget exercise, not to proceed with the firework display but to use this money for advertising the Games on Essex Radio and to supplement the funds allocated to running the events.

RECOMMENDED That the Director of Leisure be authorised to arrangéivertising accordingly and to invite an Essex Radio presence at the Games.

7. DAThOF NEXT MEETING - 7.30 P.M., MONDAY, 23RD JULY

S 009427 ROCHFOR]) DISTRICT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 6

POLICY AND RESOURCES CONMITThE — 311]) APRIL1984

REPORT OP THE CHAIRMAN' SPANEL

At a meeting held on 15th March 1984. Present: Councillors A.J. Harvey (Chairman), Mrs. P.Cooke, L.K. Cope, ft.]). Foster, 3.4. Gibson, Mrs. Jo Jones, Miss E.G.J.Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, 3.]?. Taylor and D.C. Wood.

1. COUNCIL CYCLE ENDING —17TH APRIL 1984

The Panel noted that the following reports would be made to Committee in the current cycle:—

Committee Date

Audit Panel 21.3.84 (i) Auditors' Report. (CE) Leisure Services 22.3.84 (i) Castle Hall — Licensed Ear.(OL) (ii) The 1984 Recreation Management Confer- ence. (DL) Development Services 27.3.84 (1) AWA Capital Programme — 1984/83 (ii) Draft Public Trans- port Plan and TPP. (DTP) (iii) Green Belt and Housing. (DTI') (iv) Heavy Lorry Routes. (PT?) (v) Various highway and traffic matters — meeting with Essex County Council.(SEC and WI?) Finance & Personnel 28.3 .84 (1) Sale of premises in Southend Road. (DHH) Policy & Resources 3.4.84 (i) Sale of properties — Sweyne Avenue.

2. CASTLE HALL — PROPOSED LICENSED BAR

The Panel referred to the extensions and renovations which were to be carried out at Castle Hall and noted that the Director of Leisure was recommending a possible change in the method of management which applied to the hail by the introducti a of a licensed bar.

000428 Members were agreed that this hail should remain unlicensed to enable persons hiring the premises to make their own arrangements S as to the provision of alcoholic refreshments at functions organised by them. Any change in this arrangement would seriously affect the current users of the premises.

RECOMMENDED That the Leisure Services Committee be advised that, in the opinion of the Members of the Chairman's Panel, Castle Hall should remain unlicensed following the completion of the works of extension and renovation. (6156)

3. T-LOCJCLEY — PUBLIC MEETING- 20TH MARCH 1984

The Panel noted the circumstances that had arisen and which had necessitated a change of venue from the Hockley County Primary School, Chevening Gardens, Hockley to the Old School Building in Main Road, Hockley. (917)

4. PUBLIC MEETING -RAYLEIGH WEST- 4TH APRIL 1984* (Minute 144/84) The Chairman referred to the arrangements made for this Public S Meeting at the Sweyne School, Rayleigh to explain the proposed Grange Development, the MAFF land between Rawreth Lane and London Road and French Rier suggestions for developing their land off Little Wheatleys Chase.

Members considered that having regard to the important matters to be discussed it was essential for maximum publicity to be given of the meeting. Having regard to the wide catchment area and the large number of properties which would be involved, local organisations had offered to help with the distribution of formal notices to those residents.

It was also considered desirable that the Leisure Bus should be available to take residents from the outlying parts of the area, particularly those living in Rawreth, to the meeting.

Members agreed that there could be a large attendance and the Chief Executive was asked to give full particulars to the Police as to the arrangements made so as to avoid parking problems, etc.

RECOMMENDED That the Officers proceed accordingly. (6900) (CE.DTP and SEC)

* Date changed to 18th April 1984.

5. MAKING UP OF BRAMERTON ROAD, HOCKLEY

The Director of Town Planning advised the Panel that the Bramerton Road frontagers had been consulted on the road making proposal.

The Panel were of opinion that all frontagers should be canvassed and requested to complete a questionnaire setting out views about the scheme. . 000479 The Director of Town Planning undertook to make the necessary arrangements for the canvas and a report would be made to Development Services Committee in due course. (881) (CE. and lYlE)

6. PROPOSED CLOSURE OF SUTTON SCHOOL

The Chairman of the Panel reported that at a recent meeting of the Sutton Parish Council which he and the Chairman of the Council had attended, the parishioners had reiterated their great concern at the decision taken by the Essex County Council to close the Sutton Primary School. The matter was now before the Secretary of State, Education and Science for determination and the support of the District Council was sought in making representations to the Essex County Council for the non—closure of the school.

The Panel were mindful of the serious road safety implications involved with school children having to travel between Sutton and Rochford and that these views had been communicated to the County Council. In view of these dangers, the Panel felt that the Council would wish to support Sutton Parish's representations.

RECOMMENDED That appropriate representations be made to the Secretary of State to the effect that the District Council are firmly of the view that the Sutton Primary School should not be closed, (45) (DTP & CE).

7. PROGRESS CHARTS

The Panel received progress charts on the Council's land transactions; contracts, planning and enforcement action, Court work and litigation and Council house sales.

A Member commented on the improved appearance of Oxford Parade, now that work had commenced on the site following protracted negotiations.

8. THE. ESSEX BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY EXHIBITIQ, FESTIVAL B BASILDON — 25T1i—28T11 MARCH 1984

The Panel received particulars of the Council's participation in this Exhibition, which was sponsored by the Essex County Council.

The preparation of Rochford's exhibit was being co—ordinated by the Director of Town Planning and the display included material on industrial land and building availability, sponsorship and conference opportunities, C—View information facilities and the Manpower Services programme.

The Chairman urged all Members to make a special effort to attend.

, tOvNok Pr?pe.-hts Swant !Miiut. )-ceM&L Sea mn4fc

000430 ROCUFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 6

qonmE — 3 APRIL 1984

REP ORT OF A INT SPANELYTS I

Ata meetin4 held on 16th March 1984. Present: Councillors J.A. Gibson, A.J. Harvey and Mrs. Jo Jones. Also In attendance: Mr. H. Wilson (Manpower Services Commission)

1. APPOIWEMENT OF CHAiRMAN

Councillor A.J. Harvey was appointed Chairman of the Meeting. • 2. OINTMENT OF MANAGER- flEC The Panel interviewed a short list of four candidates selected by the Director of Computer Services. It was decided unanimously to offer the appointment on a service contract and subject to the project going ahead, to Mr. Michael Bower, M1DPM presently employed by the Open University in co—ordinating nationally the support facilities for the University's computer services for staff and students.

Mr. Bower accepted the appointment on the second point of the Chief Officers' Fulcrum Scale and noted that he would be subject to Chief Of ficers' Conditions of Service. The post carried an essential user car allowance and the Panel agreed that the Chief Executive should determine which other local conditions for Chief Officers should be applied to the post. It was also agreed that the re—location expenses package authorised by Minute 361/81 should be paid w ere appropriate.

S 000431 ROCUFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 6

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE - 3RD APRIL 1984

Audit Panel held on 21st March 1984 Present: Councillors A.J. Harvey (Chairman), P.R. Helson, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor and D.C. Wood. 1&tci Councillor Miss B.G.J. Lovett. 1. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 15TH FEBRUARY 1984

These were agreed.

24 EXTERNAL AUDIT REPORT - CONTRACT PROCEDURES

The above document was con8idered and comments made as follows:—

1. Reporting of contract final costs to Committee.

It was agreed that although expenditure on contracts was shown in progress reports this would be made more specific in future.

2. Formal authorisation of overspending.

It was agreed that procedures should be introduced in this respect.

3. Monitoring of fluctuating cost contracts and preparation of regular estimates of final cost.

It was agreed that this was desirable and valuation statements would include the estimated final cost.

4. Internal audit involvement in contracts.

The recommendation that this should be comprehensive had already been implemented.

5. Final accounts should be cleared promptly.

This was accepted in principle, but it was acknowledged that the majority of delay is outside the Council's control.

6. Architects instructions should be priced.

It was agreed that ideally this should occur, but it is rarely possible to do this and no action would thyef ore be taken.

000432 7. The practice of bonding for contracts should be discontinued, the obtaining of a quotation for a bond being adequate.

The recommendation was not accepted as the current practice of considering each contract on its merits was considered to be the most appropriate.

B. The involvement of finance department in several aspects of contracts should be increased.

It had been noted that in the areas of estimating future revenue costs of contracts, financial vetting of contractors and contractual claims there was generally insufficient liaison. It was agreed that this should be rectified.

9. Review of the use of outside firms compared to directly employed staff.

This was agreed as desirable but it was felt that the use of such expertise (e.g. Quantity Surveying) by the Council was insufficient to justify direct employment.

10. Maintenance of an approved list of specialist outside firms.

Whilst accepting the principle it was felt that the limited use of such firms does not warrant a list.

11. Maintenance of an approved list of contractors.

Comments were made as for 10 above in respect of major contracts whilst noting that for minor contracts lists are already used.

12. Control over the work of outside firms should be strengthened.

Recommendations had been made in a number of areas but it was felt that no action was required, the Panel being satisfied with current practice.

13. Returned tenders should be registered on receipt.

This was agreed.

14. Details should be entered in the contracts register from the original contract.

The thought behind the recommendation was accepted but it was felt that improvement of present practice of notification was more appropriate.

. C\4) O 15. Duplication of checking and contracts registers should be eliminated.

This was agreed but it was accepted that some duplication would inevitably occur.

4. INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS

The Chief Executive reported that in the past selected Internal Audit reports had been presented to the Panel but that pressure of business had precluded this for some time. It was suggested that details of 1983/84 reports would be submitted to the next meeting.

5 • EXTERNAL AUDIT 1981/82

The Chief Executive reported on outstanding points resulting from consideration of the above report. Mention was made of the additional work undertaken by the external auditors on contracts generally and 17 South Street specifically. It was suggested that in the circumstances a fee over and above the annual fee would be appropriate, a sum of £2,500 being considered reasonable.

RECOMMENDED That an additional external audit fee of £2,500 be paid in respect of work undertaken on contract procedures.

6. AP HOUSING UNITS - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

The Director of Health and Housing reported on action taken in a number of areas which the Panel fully supported.

7. STAFF APPRAISALS

The Chief Executive reported on suggested arrangements for consideration of the above by the Panel and it was agreed that these would take place on two evenings, one for Directors and one for other staff.

000434 ROCHFORDJ)ISTRICT COUNCIL

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE — 3RD APRIL, 1984

REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY CENTRES PANEL

At a Meeting held on 29th March, 1983 at the Village Memorial 1iii, Great. Wakering. Present: Councillors A.J. Harvey (Chairman), R.D. Foster, Miss B.G.J Lovett, B. Taylor, J.A. Sheaf and D.C. Wood.

The Meeting was preceded by an inspection of the sites involved, where the Panel were joined, by prior arrangement, by the Great Wakering Parish Councillors, namely F.E.C. Jopson (Chairman), C.K. Belman, A. Dobson, H.P. Ellis, B.W. Everett, E.T. Origg, W.K. Lay, S. McDoMld and R.Aa Pearson acc'ompanied by their Clerk: Ward Councillor P. Gwinnell was in attendance at the invitation of the Parish Council.

Apologies: Parish Councillor Higham.

1. MINUTES

The Minutes of the Meeting of 23rd May 1983 were accepted as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

2. PLAYING FIELD HOUSING SCHEME & COMMUNITY CENTRE SCHEME

The Chairman of the Panel opened the Meeting by referring to the uniqueness of the occasion, it being the first time that the Panel had met a Parish Council on the latter's own territory.

He then referred to the former school playing field which had been acquired by the District Council and represented a substantial asset. It was the District Council's firm intention to develop that land for housing. A scheme had been drawn up in conjunction with Wimpey's which made provision for 41 two bedroom units and for 17 of those units to be sold to a Housing Association for an equity sharing scheme, thus partially offsetting the cost of financing the remaining Council development by the Capital Receipt. hay-Log looked carefully at the Bite it was apparent that the density planned was too high and the Panel would be recommending the Council to withdraw the current planning application in order that meaningful discussions could take place with the Parish Council on an alternative design which would be more in keeping with the 12.2 dwellings per acre density of the surrounding area. The District Council's proposal to make up North Street which would be an integral part of the development represented a considerable capital investment. The construction cost alone would be over £64,000 and if the value of the land which was required to

000435 achieve adoptable width were added then the contribution would be of the order of £100,000.

As regards the projected Community Centre the Chairman of the Panel referred to the discussions last year and reminded the Meeting that if this was to be a joint project the funding would need to be shared between the two Councils. It had been suggested that the Parish Council had a ready source of capital with the sale of non—statutory allotment land. The siting of the Conunity Centre was still a matter for discussion, but the preference of the District Council was for the extension of the existing Sports Centre, with the adjacent car parking facilities. Economies would flow from the Community Centre administration being run jointly with the Sports Centre. It was acknowledged that there was a point of view within the Parish Council which favoured the old school, which the County continued to use as a youth centre. It had however become apparent in the intervening period that there was some charitable status involved with the school which the County were discussing with the Charity Commissioners. It was therefore difficult to predict when the school might be released for other use although this might not be for many years.

In response the Chairman of the Parish Council expressed his appreciation of the decision to withdraw the application. The Parish had objected on three main aspects. The first point, namely the density, had already been acknowledged. There was then the problem of access from Olivers Crescent which was narrow and where there was already an on—street car parking problem. Finally there was concern as to whether the existing sewers were adequate to cope with expansion.

Turning to the District Council's involvement in the Community Centre project it was recalled that their assistance had been sought to make a joint approach to the County Council over the old school building. It was still regarded as the best site and the Parish Council had not abandoned their hopes of achieving it even though it was some ten years since the matter was first considered • Yet its condition was still deteriorating and it was accepted that it was far from ideal for the purpose. There were also other suitable sites in the area which served the local community and were worthy of consideration. The disadvantage of the Sports Centre was that it was not well sited in relation to the community and that in any event it drew its custom from a wider area. Villagers would not support the Community Centre project unless the building was under their control. As regards the raising of capital, it was the present policy of the Parish Council that it would not sell allotment land.

The Chairman of the Panel mentioned that it seemed a shame that the Parish did not realise this asset when suitable alternative land was available nearby in the Green Belt for allotment use. The capital so realised could be u ed to I 000436 acquire the school site if the Parish Council so decided. The County had asked to be included in the discussions on the extension to the Sports Centre as they saw it as an opportunity to relocate the youth centre from the old school. If the Parish Council wished to retain full control of all aspects of the Community Centre on a site away from the Sports Centre then they would have to be prepared to meet the full costs themselves.

A general discussion followed when the following points emerged:—

1. That the central siting was regarded as a critical factor because there was a problem of transport in the village and a relatively high proportion of elderly and very young.

2. That the Sport8 Centre needed to be expanded in its own right but that plans could not be made in that respect until it was decided whether or not the Community Centre was also to be sited there.

3. That the old school and playing field site were publicly owned assets in the hands of the County Council and the District Council respectively but that neither were free agents in the matter. Both were subject to statutoty requirement to attain full market value which was estimated in the case of the old school and car park to be between £150,000 and £200,000 because of the High Street frontage and in excess of £250,000 for the playing field.

4. That the County may not have taken seriously the ParishTs enquiry about the cost of the building but that they might if they were advised that the Parish were to sell their allotment site.

5. That it was desirable to choose an option which was within the Parish Council's scale of finance and attainable within the foreseeable future.

6. That the District Council. had considerable experience in partnership arrangements with Parish Councils to provide community centres which were designed to meet a variety of needs including guaranteed accommodation for Parish Council meetings and which had proved extremely successful.

The Chairman of the Panel said that the Parish Council needed to decide whether or not they wished to pursue a joint project for the provision of a Community Centre in the extension to the Sports Centre. The offer from the District Council to assist only related to the Sports Centre site where the Parish would not need to acquire land.

009437 U In response the Chairman of the Parish Council asked that they might be given a period of six weeks in which to consider their response as to the points which had been made and that was agreed. It was also agreed that the Officers would arrange for the Parish Council to visit other Community Centre buildings in the District and that he Direcf ir of Town Planning would prepare a basic sketch design of the sort of accommodation which might be provided. The Parish Council would also be advised of the facilities which they would be granted at the building. The Chairman of the Panel mentioned that negotiations would be taking place on a revised planning application for housing on the school playing field site based on the Design Guide criterion of 12 to 15 units to the acre and he asked the Parish Council whether they would be pursuing their objections. It was felt by the Parish Councillors that provided the density was the same as the surrounding area, the major cause of opposition had been removed although this still left the question of access, the closure of North Street and the adequacy ofthe sewers.

RECOMMENDED (1) That the application (ROC/lO/84) for Deemed Consent for the erection of 41 two bedroomed houses on the school playing field site be withdrawn.

(2) That the Director of Town Planning prepares a revised planning application based on the Design Guide criterion.

(3) That arrangements be made for the Parish Council to visit Community Centre projects in the District.

(4) That the Director of Town Planning supplies a sketch design as soon as possible of the facilities which might be provided in the Sports Centre extension.

(5) That the Director of Leisure supplies details to the Parish Council of the facilities offered to the Hawkwell Parish Council at the Freight Hous

. ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 7

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE — 3RD APRIL1984

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY TO THE COUNCIL

COMMUNITY PROGRAMME AGENCY 1984/85

In accordance with Minute 824/83 of Policy and Resources Committee on 13th December 1983, the Secretary is now in the position to report on the projects which the Manpower Services Commission approved for the second year Communty Programme Agency.

Proposed/Suggested Projects

Members will recall that Committees, in the November/December cycle, identified projects they would wish to introduce in 1984/85. These and subsequent suggestions are listed at Appendix I together with comments on their progress. More projects were proposed than the ceiling of 100 approved places set by the MSC and it is not possible to secure an increase to this allocation. However, whilst most suggestions can be adopted it has been necessary to defer some projects until 1985/86 or until such time that the MSC increase the Councilts allocation of places.

Approved Projects

With the exception of Household Surveys, it has been possible to continue and extend all of the Council's existing projects and to commence the ditch survey. The latter has not been introduced in the curretit year due to the MSC's national moratorium, placed on recruitment, over the past four months. On 8th March the MSC's Area Manpower Board approved the renewal of the Council's Agency and the following six projects: a Management Agency, Keep Britain Tidy, Community Information (C—VIEW), Roach W Valley Conservation Zone, Landscaping and Forestry Management, and Surface Drainage Improvements (Ditch Survey).

Further details on each of these projects can be found at the respective Appendices II to VII. A summary of the allocation of manpower to projects is set out below:

Managers !ul1—tim Part-time Totals Management Agency 1 1 3 5 Rep Britain Tidy 1 3 6 19 Community Information (C—VIEW) 2 5 11 18 Roach Valley Conservation Zone 2 2 8 12 Landscaping & Forestry Management. 1 17 24 42 Surface Drainage Improvements 1 4 8 13 8 32 60 100

00439 Whilst approval has been given for 100 places, comprising 51 white collar and 49 manual workers, a phased build up is necessary and it has been agreed with the MSC that the target of 100 cannot be achieved prior to August 1984. There is a high ratio of part—time posts in the overall Agency. Members will recall that this is a typical Community Programme establishment to ensure that the average weekly wage, excluding Managers, does not exceed £60.

The total budget available from the MSC is £433,124. A similar summary of project expenditure is set out below:

Wages Operating Capital Agents Totals (inc. Employers Costs Costs Fee NI & Superann- uation) £ £ £ £ £

Management Agency 24,958 1,175 585 500 27,218 Keep Britain Tidy 42,615 3,760 200 1,000 47,575 Community Inform- ation (C—VIEW) 74,858 3,540 3,500 1,800 83,698 Roach Valley Conservation Zone 52,612 4,400 1,200 58,212 Landscaping & Forestry Management 139,609 11,040 7,000 4,200 161,849 Surface Drainage Improvements 47,992 5,280 1,300 54,572

TOTALS 382,644 29,195 11,285 10,000 433,124

These levels of expenditure/reimbursement are based on the approved renewal dates of existing projects. However, taking into account the phased recruitment the anticipated expenditure/reimbursement will be approximately £407,679 during 1984/85. As for 1983/84 the Agents Fee will be used for contingency purposes to ensure the Agency is self—financing.

Conclusions

In its first year of operation the Council's Community Programme Agency has been very successful with high standards of finance/administration and work done on projects. The NSC have recognised this by increasing the Council's approved places from 91 in 1983/84 to 100 for 1964/85. Most Managing Agents in Essex have had their approved places reduced and it is understood only two other Managing Agents have received an increase for the next financial year.

The Council's Agency provides opportunities for long term unemployed people primarily in the South East Essex area covering the Rochford, Southend and Castle Point local authority boundaries. This sub—region still has very high levels of unemployment and under the Community Programme criteria a high proportion (40%) are categorised as being long term unemployed. It is not possible to obtain data on the levels of unemployment for the Rochford District, however, the January 1984 figures for South East Essex indicate 13,030 are out of work. As a wider record, the official statistics for the Southend Travel to Work Area, covering the North thames corridor from Thurrock to Foulness, shows that unemployment is running at 15.9%, nearly 3% above the national average. S 000449 In South East Essex other Management Agents operate, however, including the Council's Agency only 325 Community Programme places are available compared to over 5,000 people eligible for a place on the scheme in this sub—region. From Appendix I it is clear that the Council can still offer useful work on projects of benefit to the community. The MSC's Essex Area Office would wish to increase the number of opportunities in this area as well as the Council's Agency. Recently they are under pressure to transfer places from their Essex allocation to the north of the country. In view of our high levels of unemployment the Area Office would wish to reverse this trend and secure better provision for the county and in particular in the Southend Travel to Work Area. The Area Office would welcome the support of the Council to help in this process.

RECOMMENDED (1) That the Council makes representation, through the Essex branch of the Association of District Councils, to the Manpower Services Commission, to increase the number of Community Programme places allocated to Es sex.

(2) That the Officers continue to negotiate with the MSC's Area Office to increase the Council's allocation of Community Programme places.

000441 cobe(uwrry PEOGE.ANZ4E PROJECT • •ROPOSED 1984/85.

______COMMITFEE PROPOSAL CO*(ENT. 1. Health and Housing (Minute 783) 1.1. Extensionof the 'teep Britain Tidy" Approved. Scheme into 1984/85, 1.2. Recycling and renovating furniture from house clearances. Deferred.

1.3. Private Housing Stock Survey encouraging The MSC would want the take up of grants (from Local and Central project to show iimnediate Government) and house condition survey to coimaunity benefit and in include a note of any potential 11listable" the circumstances has been buildings. deferred.

2. Leisure Services (Minute 797) 2.1. Two posts of Warden at Grove Road and One part-time post proposed Hockley Woods. for Grove Road within the Roach Valley Conservation Zone project team,

2.2. Erection of fences around children's Insufficient timber from playgrounds. Hockley Woods — deferred. 2.3. Three posts for publicity/promotions work Accoimsodated within Roach for Rochford Leisure. Valley Conservation Zone project team. 2.4. Fencing the perimeter of Clements Hall. Insufficient timber from Hockley Woods - deferred. 2.5. Information Centre for Roach Valley Deferred - subject to Conservation Zone for multi-use purposes sponsorship. including Joint Exhibition/Seminar Room and Tea Room, small office, craft workshops/rustic furniture, storage etc. based in I-!ockley Woods. II H U 2.6. Resurface car park in Hockley Woods. I U II I? 2.7. Trail for disabled people and push—chairs in Hockley Woods. /contd.... PROPOSED COMMUNITY PROGRAMME PROJECTS 1984/83 (contdj

COMMIDFEE PROPQSAJ COMMENT

Leisure Services (contd,) 2.8. Floral displays throughdut the District. It may be possible to include this within the "Keep Britain Tidy" project as part of the 'Beautiful Britain' campaign. C C 2.9. Full—time supervision of the Council's Deferred. C play fields.

Wa 2.10. Continue Landscaping and Forestry Approved. Management project. 3. DevelopmentServices (Minute 824) 3.1. Ditch Survey, Approved as the Surface Drainage Improvements proj ect.

3.2. Waymarking bridlepaths and footpaths. Accommodated within the Roach Valley Conservation Zone and Landscaping and Forestry Management projects.

1V II 3.3. Extension of landscaping on River Roach.

3.4. Bridlepaths surface improvements. Deferred - insuffictettrnourcas

3.5. Countryside promotions/education. Accouniodated within the Roach Valley Conservation Zone project.

3.6. Continue Roach Valley Conservation Zone project. Approved.

3.7. Culling planning files. Outside the scope of revised Cotmnunity Prograrane criteria.

0 IV It 4. Finance and Personnel (Minute 4.1. Land Charges Survey/Computerisation 824/83) 4.2. Management Agency. Approved.

5. PotIcy' arid Resources (Minute 824/83) 5.1. Continue °C-VIEW" Project. kpproved.

Business Survey. Accotmnodated in . C_VIEoPro3ect. Appendix ii.

MANAGEMENT AWL) ADMINISTRATION 0? COMMUNITY PROGRAMME-. AGENCY. Project Descflptj.

The main areas of work are:

a) Development of existing/new projects Including all liaison necessary with interested parties in both public and private sector.

b) Recruitment of all C.P. employees.

c) linpiementing/reconnending training progranmies.

d) Financial administration and accounts — overall budgetary control, MSC returns, salaries and purchasing/ordering of all goods/services. e) Updating all financial and personnel systems.

f) Monitoring/assisting project managers.

Es tabjishment.

1. x Agency Manager. I x flT Secretary, I x Clerical Assistant.

2 x PIT Clerical Assistants.

trie_Rewa_]j: 01 • 04•84.

000444 Appendix Ill.

KEEP BRITAIN TIDY

Protect Descflption.

This is an extension of the Keep Britain Tidy Project which commenced on 21st March 1983. The second phase will include:

1. Community Liaison - a continuation of the Keep Britain Tidy Scheme especially with community, youth and voluntary groups and pariah councils to monitor and identify sources of litter and dumping within the District Council area.

2. Industry/Commerce Liaison. The officer to liaise with local industry and commerce to assist with ways of effective disposal of rubbish front industrial and commercial premises.

3. Schools. To implement the Keep Britain Tidy Educational System with particular reference to the 4/7, 7/9 and 10/lI year olds. The training of the teachers will be conducted by the Educational Officer of Keep Britain Tidy.

4. Publicity/Public Relations, To be responsible for evolving and promoting exhibitions at school fetes, fairs, markets and at locations frequented by members of the public.

5. Implementation of the wheeled-bin for a second round.

Establishment.

I. x Manager 3 x Project Officers 3 x UT Education Officers 1 x P/P Clerical Assistant.

Proppsed Start Date. 01.04.84.

. 000445 Appendix TV

COMMUNITY INFORMATIO1JC -VIEW"k

Project DescrLptjcfll. Project to comprise expansion and extension of "C-VIEW" (Coninunity Viewdata). Cotmaunity Information Service to include Products/ Services provided by businesses for an on-line business directory for both businesses and the general. public. Merging of Essex Radio and Chelmaford Diocese (C. of E.) databases with "C-VIEW". Inclusion of legal information index for local users. Installation of more terminals in public places.

Listing and revising job opportunities on a daily basis in conjunction with the Jobcentre.

Co-operation with other welfare and community services (such as C,A.B,) to improve their own and "C-VIEW's" information service. Initiate inter-active schools programs based on micro/viewdata instructions,

Launch radio "teach-in" with Essex Radio in introduce "C-VIEW" to micro owners,

Establishment.

1. x Controller. 1 x Manager. I x Editor Programmer. 1 x Sales Officer. 1 x Data Control Clerk. 1 x Data Input Demonstrator. 1 x Business Directory Officer. I x PIT Education Assistant. 7 x P/T Project Assistants. 2 x P/T Data input Operators. 1 x PIT Clerk/Typist. Projct Renewal Datet 01,04.84.

009446 Appendix V ROACH VALLEY CONSERVATION Z.QN

Project Description.

The main objective of the project is to promote conservation within the designated area. The new team will consist of 12 staff. The main areas of activity are;

1, Education. Continuation of designing training icits for all school ages. The work to include the promotion of sites of special scientific interest, e.g. Hockley Woods.

2. "Waters Edge". A study of riverside, Bait marshes and pond habitats. To identify areas of outstanding conservation value and promote awareness of them. This will be part of the 1984 International "Waters Edge" Campaign co-ordinated by COENCO for the Nature Conservancy Council.

3. Project Officers. Liaison with farmers and voluntary organisations, implementation of comprehensive footpath scheme, promotion of the "Waters Edge" and compilation of interpretive material, The work will also include the duties of advice, assistance and guidance on various woodland sites, the general supervision of woodland and play areas, Guided tours of woodland. To encourage tourism into the area publicity leaflets will be produced and full details of short-stay accoamodation will be compiled.

Es tab 1 i1, lx Manager. lx Ecological Research Supervisor. 2x Project Officers. 5x PIT Project Officers. lx P/T Graphic Artist. lx PIT Clerk Typist, lx PIT Education Officer,

Project Renewal Date: 06.06,84.

. 000447 Appendix ANDSCAPIG AND, FORESTRY MANACEtEN1i

9JECT DESCRZPTION.

1. HOCKLEY WOODS — Work to be carried out to include:

1) Coppicing. 2) Bridlepaths.. 3) Disabled trail. ) 4) Car park surfacing. ) Subject to sponsorship. 5) Multi-purpose building. ) 6) Pond clearance. 7) Tree surgery. 8) Landscaping. 9) Woodland crafts. 10) Manufacture of rustic furniture and recycling furniture of wooden construction.

2. GROVE ROAD.

1) Opening a network of walks and footpaths. 2) Providing and surfacing a horse riding trail. 3) Woodland management involving removal of hawthorn and promotion of standard trees. 4) Extension of management into adjoining land owned by the Anglian Water Authority. 5) 4ndscaping. 3. BETTS WOOD.

For Management proposals the wood is considered in two separate zones:

ZONE A. escri tion:

This central area is predominantly coppice Hotnbeam, with a few mature Oak standards. The coppice is approximately 10—15 years old.

Prop osed Management.

1. Coppice all the existing stools to restart the coppice cycle. This would open up the area allowing a new field layer to develop.

2. Plant young Oaks in parts of this area if and when funds become available.

ZONE B. (U/A at present).

4. CREAT WA!NG COMMON.

The Common is n area of rough grassland and ditches and is used for informal rec reation by local residents. The Common is also of considerable conservation value with several rare plant species.

Roach Valley Conservation Zone staff have already surveyed the s.te and are preparing detailed management plans. The proposed work includes:

1. Clearance of hawthorn and bramble invading grassland. 2. Management of ditches. 3. Digging out of an old pond which is now silted up. 4. Creation of a waymarked route of paths. 5. Preparation of car park surface and associated picnic area. 040148 /conLd.... Appendix ¶/t. (Cont'd.)

5. KINGLEY WOOD0 ([oach Valley Conservation.Zone).

1. Prepare management plan for planning purposes. 2. Implement approved plan.

6. PURDEYS INDUSTRXAL ESTATE.

1. Extend tree planting and bridleways to west and east. 2. Subject to the Anglian Water Authority Agreement salt marsh management (see waters edge — Roach Valley Conservation Zone),

7. I-IULLBRIDGE FORESHORE.

I. Manage woodland adjoining foreshore. (see waters edge).

8. WAYMARKING FOOtPATHS..

1. SubJect to negotiations.

Es tab l.ishment.

I. x Manager. 6 x Gangers. 11 x Manual Workers. 24 x P/T Manual Workers. Prolect Renewal. Date. 01.11.84. .

. 000449 Appendix VII.

SURFACE DEAINACE IMPROVEMENTS.

Prol act Description.

To undertake a detailed survey of the District's ditches and develop comprehensive records. Because of the wide geographical area and number of ditches the initial prograns of surveys will concentrat*on areas where continuous and potential flooding has been identified, but is subject to a detailed survey. Survey staff will produce information on the size, direction of flaw, conditions of ditches, etc. for the Director of town Planning. To progress this project the NBC have set a condition that the project must employ manual workers in order that Imediate relief or work is done on ditches. Of course, many ditches requiring work will be in private land ownership and it will be necessary to obtain their permission to work on their land.

Etab Ushment.

t X Manager.

I x Ganger.

I x Manual Worker.

6 x p/t Manual Workers.

2 x Project Officers.

2 x PIT Project Officers.

Protect_$tart Date: 01.04.84.

000450 ROCRFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 8

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE - 3RD APRIL 1984

REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

PUBLIC MEETING - 20Th MARCH 1984 PROPOSALS FOR TILE USE OP THE OLD HOCKLEY COUNTY- PRIMARY SCHOOL LAND AND BUILDINGS (Ninutflt9/84)

Members will recall that this Meeting was arranged to explain to local residents and interested parties the proposals of the District Council and the County Council for the future use of this site.

The Public Meeting, the venue for which had to be transferred to the Old School refectory building, was attended by some 50 persons with Councillor D.C. Wood presiding. The Chairman was supported by the Chief Executive, the Director of Computer Services, the Director of Town Planning, and the Secretary to the Council and Mr. K. Derry, Assistant County Planner and Mr. R. Vidler, County Estates Department represented the County Council.

Having opened the Meeting the Chairman called upon the Director of Town Planning to identify the three separate parts of the overall site. The Director displayed a plan (copy appended) and described —

Area I as being the main school building and curtilage which was to be utilised by the District Council as an ITEC.

Area 2 as being the subject of proposals by the County Council.

Area 3 as being the playing field land which would revert to open space once the playing fields at the new school were ready for use.

The Chief Executive and Director of Computer Services then presented the case for the ITEC and apart from some reservations being expressed over the limited on site parking provision, the project had a large measure of support. It was noted that the Council would be paying the full market rent for its ten year lease of the building.

The Assistant County Planner dealt with the County Council's plans for Area 2. It was the policy of the County Council, as required by legislation) to dispose of its surplus assets at the best possible price. This did not preclude the purchase of land and buildings for community purposes but the price paid. would still have to reflect the full development potential of the site. In this case the County considered that the whole of Area 2 could be developed with five large detached houses with access off a drive leading to Main Road through the site of the existing school caretaker's house. there was criticism of the confidentiality which had surrounded the County's consideration of the future use of the site and the fact that the County were not prepared to consider current use values for community uses of the land and buildings comprising Area 2. As to the proposed development there was concern that the playing field might itself become vulnerable to development in later years although assurances were given in this respect.

It was explained that the County were able to deem themselves planning permission in much the same way as the District Council but that their application for the site had yet to be submitted.

At the conclusion of the debate a representative of a local Action Committee formed to secure the use of the school buildings and land for community purposes read the following resolution which had been passed at a meeting convened by them the previous week.

The earlier meeting had

"(a) Approved the Committee's proposal to resist any application to develop the site for any purpose other than as an amenity for public and community use.

(b) Sought the intervention of the Secretary of State without delay to determine any planning application affecting the site other than the existing proposal for the ITEC college in the main school building.

(c) Authorised the Committee to negotiate with all the local authorities with a view to ensuring that the site is retained in public ownership as a public amenity and for community purposes.

(d) Asked the District Council to seek the advice of the District Valuer as to the value of the site on the alternative basis of amenity use (current use) and with the benefit of planning consent for residential purposes in order that the public may be aware of the "hope" element of the County Council's proposals."

Immediately after the Public Meeting representatives of the Action Committee sought a meeting with the Chief Executive but in view of the implications it is ;uggested that Member involvement is necessary.

. 000452 RECOMMENDED (1) That the Committee consider whether the Council should express any views on the County's proposals for the site in advance of the consultations on the planning application.

(2) That the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee be authorised to meet the Action Committee. (7767) tL

H.ckl.y

Playing Field

''S 0 c:3 c3j C ROCUPORD DISTRICT COUNCIL Minutes of the Planng Services Committee

At a Meeting held on 10th April 1984. Present: Councillors R. D.Foster (Chairman), C.B.Alger, R.H. Boyd, W.H. Budge, Mrs. L.M.A. Campbell—Daley, Mrs. P. Cooke, L.K. Cope, B.A. Crick, E.E. Daley, T.L. Dean, T. Fawell, B.T. Grigg, P. Gwinnell, A.J. Harvey, Mrs. P.E. Hawke, D.R. Helson, Mrs. Jo Jones, M.J. Jones, Miss B.G.J. Lovett, Mrs. 3.11. Munson, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, 0.3. Skinner, C. Stephenson, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, E.S.Whitworth and D.C. Wood.

Apologies: Councillors T.H. Burt, J.E. Nokes, 3.?. Taylor and T.J. Warner.

280. MINTIJTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 8th March 1984 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

281. MONITORING OP PERFORMANCE — MEETINGS OP 10TH NOVEMBER 1983 AND 5TH JANUARY 1984

The Committee were satisfied that all necessary action had been taken.

It was noted that reports would be submitted to the meeting on 26th April on Eooseys Nursery, Southend Road (Minute 631/82) and 25—29 West Street, Rochford (Minute 254/83).

Minute 7/84, paras 9 and 10, were carried forward. (21210)

282. PROPOSED TENNIS CENTRE, JOURNEYMANS WAY, TEMPLE FARM INDUSTRIAL STATE, SUTTON ROAD, SOUTHEND-ON—SEA — APPLICATION NO. 303/1500/83 (Minute 98/84) The Committee noted that despite representations from this Authority the Southend—on—Sea Borough Coñncil after due consideration of the planning issues had granted the application. (303/1500/83)

283. ROC/721/83 — ThREE DETACHED HOUSES ON LAND ADJOINING THE GATTENçmOcKLEY_OAD, RAYLEIGH The Director of Town Planning reminded the Committee that the above outline application for three detached houses on this site had been refused because part of it was in the Green Belt and because the County Surveyor had issued a direction. However, part of the site already had a detailed planning permission for one unit. The applicant had appealed against the refusal but this was being held in abeyance pending the Council giving its views on a revised proposal for two detached dwellings on that part of the site which already had permission for one house.

The Committee did not consider that any intensification in P].azming Services

the development of the site would be acceptable.

Resolved that the applicant be advised accordingly. (ROC/72l/83) (DTP)

284. CAMPAIGN FOR THE REGISTRATION OF LISTED BUILDING CONSENTS

The Director of Town Planning reported that Mr. Richard Griffith, LA., Dip. Arch., of Bath was seeking the support of local planning authorities to his representations to the new Historic Buildings Commission for legislation to provide for the registration of listed building consents on a national level.

RECONNENDED That the Council supports Mr. Griffith in principle in his attempt to persuade the Historic Buildings Commission to consider the case for national registration of listed building consents and that a letter be sent accordingly. (1673) (DTP)

285. APPEALS DECIDED AND APPEALS LODGED, TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS AND BUILDING PRESERVATION NOTICES

The Committee noted the information as set out in the Agenda.

286. SCHEDULE OP DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Director of Town Planning submitted a schedule for consideration and a list of applications decided under delegation.

Resolved that decisions be made in accordance with the recommendations in the appended schedules, subject to:—

Para.2 — ROC/O84/84

NOTE: Councillor R.H. Boyd declared an interest by way of acquaintance with the applicant but remained in the meeting and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

Para.6 — ROC/O59/84

The Director of Town Planning referred to the letter from the applicants circulated with the Agenda.

Pare. 7—ROC/l46/84

Amend "development" in last line of Condition 2 to read "dwellings4t.

The Director of Town Planning reported that the Director of Health and Housing and the County Surveyor had no observations on the application. . 000456 Planning Servace

Para.9 — ROC/038/84

The Committee noted that at the request of the Agent the application had been withdrawn and that alternative proposals were to be submitted on which the applicant desired consultations with the Chairman and the Ward Members.

Para.lO — ROC/169184/CC

Arising from the consideration of this item the Director of Town Planning was authorised to approve any future application for the renewal of a temporary permission for demountable classrooms. New applications would continue to be dealt with by the Committee.

Para.l4 — ROC/075/84

Amend proposal to read "erect two detached dwellings'.

Para.l6 — ROC/723/83

Amend references to "Stile Lane" to read "King Georges Close".

Para.27 — ROC/070/84

Application deferred pending outcome of current appeal.

Para.28 — ROC/845/83

Add to comment of Director of Health and Housing — final paragraph, second line after "envisaged" — "from the extraction proposals".

Para.30 — ROC/604183

The Chairman reported on the unsuccessful attempts which had been made to arrange a convenient time for the site visit and indicated that a final effort would be made to hold this prior to the meeting of the Committee on 26th April, but that the matter would be determined by the Committee at that meeting in any event.

Para.3l — ROC/l29/84

Add condition —

6. No floodlighting shall be implemented within the car park area without such proposals having first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

000457 IJEVELOPMENT CONTROL APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED

DURING THIS SESSION.

009458 PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE.

10th. APRIL 1984. — SCHEDULE INDEX.

ITEM APP.SNO. SITE ADDRESS OFFICER

1. 97/84 14, HIGH ELMS RD., HULLBRIDGE TMM

2. 84/84 17-19, MAIN RD, HOCKLEY PMM

3. 41/84 'KLIWGEL HAUS', EASTWOOD RISE, RAYLEIGH TMM

4. 820/83 'THE PUNCH BOWL', CHURCH END, PAGLESHLM BRP

5. 35/83LB 'THE PUNCH BOWL', CHURCH END, PAGLESHAM BRP

6. 59/84 NEW HALL NURSERY, LOWER RD., HOCKLEY TMM

7. 146/84 234/236, MAIN ROAD, RAWKWELL BRP

8. 117/84 'CREEKSEA FERRY INN', WALLASEA ISLAND JRF

9, 38/84 28(TREEHURST), WESTERN RD., RAYLEIGH TMM

10. 169/84CC PRIMARY SCHOOL, LAMBOURNE HALL RD., JRF CANEWDON.

11. 168/84GD WHITE CITY, FOULNESS ISLAND TMNI

12. 26/S3AD 'LA ROMANTICA', 6, HIGH ST., RAYLEIGH 3W

13. 74/84 LAND NORTH OF 457, ASHINGDON RD., TMM ROCHFORD

14. 75/84 LAND SOUTH OF 469, ASHINGDON RD., TMM ROCHFORD

15. 73/84 HIGHLANDS FARM, BEECHES RD., RAWRETH JRF

16. 723/83 63, EASTWOOD RD., RAYLEIGH BRP

17. 24/84 "CRANLEY, THE WALK, HULLBRIDGE FCC

18. 39/84 63, HIGH ST., GREAT WAKERING SG

19. 42/84 LAND ADJ. 'TOPCROFT'C8), HILLVIEW RD., TMM RAYLEIGH

20. 49/84 115, SOUTHEND RD., ROCHFORD SG

21. 54/84 54, WINDERMERE AVENUE, HULLBRIDGE PCC

22. 58/84 CHURCH HALL, CHURCH RD., ASHINGDON PCC

000459 23. 91/84 "TYRELL", BAttLING RD., BARLING BRP

24. 99/84CC ROCHFORD HOSPITAL BRP

25. 115/84 22, YORK RD., HAWKWELL FCC

26. 122/84 1, TOTMAN CLOSE, RAYLEIGH BRP 27. 70/84 LAND SOUTH OF 66, WOODLANDS RD., TMM HOCKLEY

28. 845/83 BARLING HALL FARM, BARLING MAGNA JAA 29. 26/84LB LITTLE WAKERING HALL, GREAT WAKERING JAA 30. 604/83 'ROSE GARDEN', ALDERMANS HILL, HOCKLEY BRP 31. 129/84 'SILVER JUBILEE', EASTWOOD RD., BRP RAYLEIGH

32. 148/84 LAND OPPOSITE 'GLENMOUNT', WARWICK RD., BRP RAYLEIGH

S

S 000160 PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE.

10th. APRIL 1984.

SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS, WITH DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR DETERMINATION AT THIS COMMITTEE,

1. ROC/097/84 UULLBRIDGE. 14, HIGH ELMS ROAt, HULLBRIDGE.

Demolish existing bungalow and erect two detached houses, with integral garages. Hecray Co.Ltd., do Robert H.Russell, 20, Faibro Crescent, Hadleigh, Essex. Frontage:18m(60'); Depth:36.Sm(120'); Density:12.5 d.pa. Floor Area:128sq.m. (l38Osg.ft).

RECOMMENDATION: PPROVALJ_SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. S - Submit materials schedule. • 3. Std. Cond. 12A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Cond. 14 — 1.Sm.(6') high fencing to be erected. 5. Std. Cond. 15 - Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure to be approved by L.P.A. 6. The high level windows in the flank wall, providing secondary light to the lounge and dining room, shall be obscure glazed.

REPORT: This is an inf ill development in a street of mixed house types. The site is situated between a pair of bungalows and a detached chalet, but the street is dominated by two—storey dwellings and I therefore consider the submitted house designs to be acceptable.

1

Q094&I The adjoining residents have been notified of the proposal, and no representations have been received.

2. ROC/084/84 HOCKLEY.

17-19, MAIN ROAD, HOCKLEY.

Form roof garden, with balustrade wall and garden store.

Trevor A. Murray, 17—19, Main Road, Hockley.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. The enclosed roof area and proposed garden furniture store shall be used for domestic purposes only, ancillary to the residential accommodation at 19, Main Road, Hockley. 2. The external finishes of the proposed balustrade wall and garden store shall be as specified in the submitted application, to match the existing buildings

REPORT: This is a revised application, following the refusal of' a previous proposal which sought to enclose the roof area with a l.350m(4'511) high wall. The applicant and his family occupy a flat on the upper floors at 19, Main Road and wish to utilise the existing flat roof area at the rear as a roof garden. There is no space available for sitting out, or for children to play at the rear of this mainly commercial block.

The objections to the previous proposal related to the appearance of the development, and loss of privacy by reason of overlooking of nearby residential curtilages in Woodlands Road and woodlands Close. In an attempt to overcome these objections the applicant now intends to erect a higher balustrade wall of l.6m(5'3"), and the inclusion of a pitched roof garden store structure on the rear edge. This would effectively prevent overlooking of the nearby curtilages, and whilst the balustrade wall is higher, I consider the increased height, together with the garden store, would produce a more attractive appearance to the development, as well as improving the very plain elevations of the existing flat roof extension at the rear.

Ten residents in the immediate vicinity have been notified of the new application, and to date two have confirmed that they have no objections. Another six have objected strongly on the grounds of loss of privacy, noise, and unsightly appearance. The objection letters have been received from the occupiers of Nos. 8,10,12,14 and 16 Woodlands Road, and from No.1, woodlands Close.

2 0004G2 3. ROC/041/84 RAYLEIGH. 'KLINGEL HAUS', EASTW000 RISE, RAYLEIGH.

Outline application to erect three dwellings.

A.C.Cornish c/c David J.Littlewood, 39, Hambro Hill, Rayleigh.

Frontage:29.26m(96'3"); Depth:36.575m(120'); Density:ll.5 d.p.a.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The site is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt where permission is not normally given for new residential development. Whilst permissions have been granted for infilling developments along much of the Eastwood Rise frontage it is considered that a development of three dwellings on the application site would appear unduly cramped in comparison to the existing properties in the street to the detriment of the character and appearance of the street, and its situation within the Green Belt. 2. The application site forms a vital part of the curtilage of 'Elingel Haus', which has its front elevation and means of access directly across the land. To develop the site in the manner proposed would divorce the existing property from Eastwood Rise and seriously and adversely affect its setting, to the detriment of both the property itself, and Eastwood Rise. 3. If permitted, the ptoposal would result in the existing dwelling being 'in tandem' with the proposed new properties which is a relationship that the Authority would not normally consider acceptable. Indeed, it is the adopted policy of the Local Planning Authority to resist 'tandem' developments, as defined in Development Control Policy Note No.2 relating to Residential Areas. 4. The close proximity and aspect of the existing dwelling 'Klingel Haus' would result in the proposed curtilages being directly overlooked by the existing property, and a total lack of privacy in the private garden areas of the proposed dwellings. REPORT: The occupier of the adjacent dwelling 'Fairwinds' considers that no further development should be permitted in the area until proper roads and sewers are available.

The occupier of 'Dahlia Lodge' objects on the following grounds:—

3

000463 I a) further erosion of the Green Belt; b) developers have previously failed to comply with laid down conditions; a) the road is inadequate and would deteriorate; d) main drainage facilities are inadequate and therefore present a pollution risk. The Director of Health and Housing is concerned about main drainage arrangements in this area. There are private pumped systems available, but foul drainage generally has been causing considerable problems. If approval of this scheme were to be contemplated then any permission granted should be conditional on the properties proposed being connected to a public sewer.

4,, ROC/820/83 ROACH GROUP.

'THE PUNCH BOWL', CHURCH PAGLESHAN. , . Extend existing permission to site a residential caravan (ROC/839/Bl refers).

Mr. R.J.Lyon, do Abbotts, 22,South Street, Rochford, Essex0

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. The permission hereby granted shall cease on or before 30th. April 1985, at which time the caravan shall be removed from the site. 2. Occupation of the caravan the subject of this permission shall be solely for the purpose of providing sleeping accommodation for a worker employed at 'The Punch Bowl' Public House.

REPORT: This application is submitted in tandem with ROC/35/ 83/LB, which is the following item on the schedule. This caravan has been the subject of two previous appeals, on applications ROC/928/75 and ROC/5l6/78. The first appeal was allowed on 24th. September 1976, subject to two conditions that required the caravan to be removed by 30th. September 1978, and restricted its occupancy to an employee of 'The Punch Bowl' Public House. In allowing the appeal the Inspector concluded that: "The caravan has, however, been on the site for some time, to provide sleeping accommodation for one employee at the Punch Bowl, and in the circumstances I consider it would be unreasonable to require its use to cease immediately but that it should only be allowed to remain for a limited period, and its

4 . use restricted for sleeping an employee. Changes in the tenancy • of the public house, and in the employment of staff, could take place at any time and if additional residential accommodation is to continue to be necessary on a prmanent basis it should not, for the reasons alrea4y g4v, be in a caravan." In the subsequent appeal against the refusal of planning permission to extend the period, on 28th. June 1979, a different Inspector stated: "The effect of the previous appeal decision was to grant a temporary permission until 30th. September 1978 for the retention of the caravan, 22ft. x 6ft. x 7ft.6ins. high, to enable an essential employee to be retained at The Punch Bowl. You point out that it has not yet been possible to secure lodgings for the employee in this tiny settlement; and I accept that the purchase of any one of the few but attractive dwellings for this purpose would probably be an uneconomical proposition. This is not to howeve that continuous effort should not be made to obtain appropriate prnanent accommodation. In such circumstances the use of the caravan is, in my opinion, justified." The Inspector further stated that because of existing screening: "The presence of the caravan can not therefore be said to have any detrimental effect on the conservation area or on the character of the Green Belt. There is no evidence to show that alternative housing is available and there is no nearby settlement within easy reach where such accommodation might be provided. Having therefore considered all matters raised in this case I have come to the conclusion that an extension of time for the retention of the caravan for occupation by the employee concerned until September 1980 is a reasonable request which should be granted." Subsequent to these appeal decisions a further extension of the temporary permission was granted which expired on 17th. February 1982 (ROC/839/8l refers). This application now seeks to extend the permission for a further period, and the following letter has been submitted in support: "As you know this is a small hamlet in which there are no flats or other small unit accommodation. Probably all the houses are owner occupied by people who do not take in lodgers. The Applicant who lives in, and is in business in the hamlet, is probably in as good a position as anyone to find alternative accommodation but, although he is continually looking, has been unable to find any suitable accommodation for an employee." A caravan has now been on this site since 1975, and in my view ample time has been given to allow the occupier to find alternative accommodation. In framing my recommendation I consider that Paragraph 6 of the first appeal decision is particularly relevant: "Nevertheless, whilst I accept that your client needs Ic 000485 assistance if he is to run his business efficiently and that he is unlikely to secure permanent assistance without some accommodation, I am of the opinion that there is no case for the • establishment of a permanent residential unit of accommodation in a caravan on the premises. To agree to this form of development would be contrary to the policy normally followed whereby new development in a green belt is restricted to that shown to be necessary in the interests of agriculture or for some rural pursuit. Moreover I regard a caravan as a form of development out of keeping with the majority of buildings in this hamlet, more particularly as it is under consideration as a possible conservation area."

The County Planner has been consulted and states that: "...if accommodation is required on a permanent basis I would suggest that some extension to the public house could be negotiated. TI

However, he recommends refusal of this proposal on the grounds that it would be detrimental to the character of the listed building, and of the Paglesham Church End Conservation Area. To prevent hardship to the owner/occupier I therefore recommend that planning permission be granted for a further period of one year only, with a proviso that the applicant be informed that no further extension of time will be granted after this period.

5. ROC/035/83/LB ROACH GROUP.

'THE PUNCH BOWL', CHURCH END, PAGLESFIAM.

permission to site caravan for employee's sleeping accommodation.

Mr. R,J,Lyon, do Abbotts, 22,South Street, Rochford, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. The permission hereby granted shall cease on or before 30th. April 1985, at which time the caravan shall be removed from the site. 2. Occupation of the caravan the subject of this permission shall be solely for the purpose of providing sleeping accommodation for a worker employed at 'The Punch Bowl' Public House.

REPORT: This application is submitted in tandem with ROC/820/83, the preceding item on the schedule.

6 000466 6. ROC/059/84 ASHINGDON. NEW HALL NURSERY, LOWER ROAD, HOCKLEY.

Erect detached single storey building for use as tea room and toilets, and enlargement of existing pond. J.Foster and S.Kingston, do Graham and Baldwin, 149, Green Lane, Eastwood, Leigh—on—Sea, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Std. Reason 36A. Metropolitan Green Belt.

2. The proposed tea room facility would constitute an unacceptable commercial use in the Green Belt. 3. The proposed tea room facility is not considered to be essential to serve the needs of the existing nursery. 4. The proposed tea room facility would draw additional traffic to the site, adversely affecting the free flow and safety of traffic in Lower Road.

REPORT: The element of the proposal which gives me cause for concern is the proposed tea room. In March 1990 the Council refused permission to change the use of a store building to a cafe and retail shop, and the decision was supported on appeal (ROC/59/77 refers). In his decision, the Inspector took the view that a cafe would constitute an commercial use in the Green Belt,' drawing additional • unacceptabletraffic to the site, and affecting the free flow and safety of traffic in Lower Road. Whilst the Inspector felt that the provision of refreshments to customers coming to the nursery might be relatively innocuous there was a real danger that sometime in the future it could serve a much wider clientele, and possibly in the future result in the establishment of an additional commercial use unrelated to the nursery, in an isolated location in the Green Belt. Appended to the schedule of applications is a copy of a letter, dated 24th. January 1984 which the applicant submitted with the application (enclosing several copies of the letter) with a request that copies be circulated to Members of the Committee. The Ashingdon Parish Council object to the proposed tea room on the grounds that it would be detrimental to the surrounding area, and attract additional traffic, thereby creating an additional

7

000467 traffic hazard. S

7. ROC/146/84 HAWKWELL.

234/236, MAIN ROAD, HAWKWELL.

Change of use from shops to residential dwellings.

P,J,Calladine, c/o Nigel Cooper M.F.B., 62, Sutton Road, Rochford, Essex.

Frontage:12.9m(4Oft.); Depth:30.4m(lOOft.); Floor Area:lOOsq.m. (1,OBOsq.ft.).

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVALL SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. I 2. The proposed access, parking spaces and turning area shall be hardsurfaced in accordance with details to be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the Local Planning Authority. Such details as agreed shall be completed prior to the occupation of the proposed development. 3. $td. Cond. 14 — l.8m(6ft.) high fencing to be erected. 4. Std. Cond. 29 — Dwelling not to be enlarged or altered without prior approval. 5. Std. Cond. 35 — Brick wall to be erected to front boundary.

REPORT: This proposal seeks to restore an old pair of semi-detached houses, with ground floor shops, back to a residential use, and will result in an attractive form of development.

I am at present awaiting the views of the County Surveyor, and of the Director of Health and Housing, and will report these verbally at the meeting.

8. ROC/ll7/84 CANEWDON 'CREEKSEA FERRY INN', WALLASEA ISLAND, CANEWDON.

outline application to re—build premises as original. . 000183 Mr. A.G.Seaby, c/c Ronald. G. Radley, 607, Daws Heath Road, Hadleigh, Essex. Site Area: 0.l4hectares (0.34 acres).

RECOMMENDATI0N: APPROVAL, S(JBJFCT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 1A - Reserved Matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years). 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development orders 1977— 1981, no gates, fences, walls, other means of enclosure, or other structures shall be erected within the curtilage of the site, other than those agreed as reserved matters, without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 4. Any residential accommodation provided within the site shall • be contained within the building hereby approved, and such accommodation shall be used to provide residential accommodation ancillary to the use of the 'Creeksea Ferry Inn' only, and for no other purpose without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

5. Provision shall be made within the site for the parking and turning of trade, customers and staff vehicles, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, and prior to the building being occupied.

REPQRT: The Creeksea Ferry Inn was extensively damaged by fire in January this year. The current owners, who have only recently acquired the property, are anxious to either re—instate the damaged areas or re-build the Inn. Although the site is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the Roach valley Conservation Zone, it is considered that, bearing in mind that an Inn has stood on this site since 1625 and that it provides a venue for local people and visitors by road and water to relax by the riverside and enjoy the entertainment and refreshment provided by the Inn, it would be unreasonable not to permit the building to be replaced.

There are several advantages, from a Town Planning ppint of view, in permitting redevelopment of this site rather than re- instatement of the damaged areas, which are extensive; 1. A far more practical layout of the site could be achieved, by orientation of the building through 90 degrees, and the Anglian Water Authority would welcome a relocation of the building further away from the sea wall, as indicated on the submitte outline plan; 4..

9 OO 04 69 2. The car parking provision could be greatly improved over that existing, by a more practical layout, extra spaces and, with suitable enclosing walls and adequate landscaping,' such car parking would be far less obtrusive;

3. The provision of living accommodation which existed within the building was very sparse and extremely restricted, mostly due to an extremely poor internal layout of the building. This lack of suitable residential accommodation, coupled with the almost total lack of security enclosures around the building, undoubtedly made a significant contribution to the incidence of vandalism and to the several fires which have occured over the years. A suitably designed building, with a reasonable amount of residential accommodation for the occupier and his family, with suitable security enclosures should encourage permanent occupation of the building which, when built to modern Building Regulations standards, should assist in reducing fires and vandalism;

4. A previous occupier, in an effort to improve the situation regarding the lack of residential accommodation and storage facilities, commenced the construction of a two—storey extension at the rear. Unfortunately he did not obtain planning permission first and, as the result of action by the Local Planning Authority, certain parts of the unauthorised structure were removed so that only 2 metre high walls remained. The fact that the extension was situated over a filled in and disused swimmimg pool made it extremely difficult for the occupier to justify the stabilty of the extension anyway, and other attempts to design a suitable rear extension have been frustrated by the presence of the old swimmxmg pool. The unsightly network of walls that still remains over the swimmimng pool fell within the category of 'Permitted Development' and did not require planning permission from this Authority. Redevelopment of the site should ensure that ALL structures and buildings are removed, and that further structures are not erected without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority;

5. The submitted application, although for outline planning permission, indicates a suggested layout and elevations of the proposed building which is completely in character with the area, and also reflects to some extent the historical background of the site. In support of the application, the applicant's agent has included an account of this background, two paragraphs of which are of particular interest: "In 1625 a Ferry House is recorded on the site....During this, and subsequent periods, much use was made of the ferry lint between Wallasea Island and Creeksea and Burnham....The name currently used — Creeksea - has changed several times during the centuries. The original Ferryman was known as the 'Man of Crixie', this name being subsequently changed to 'Cricksey' during the 18th. Century. During the 16th. and 17th. centuries the area was notorious for smuggling during a period when military camps were sited on Foulness Island, from where it was possible to pass a message by beacon to Portsmouth in about half an hour. The original F rry

000i70 10 House became licensed premises about 200 years ago, and a public • house has existed on the site continuously since." If Members are minded to grant outline planning permission I would request that I am delegated to negotiate details of the layout of the site, any additional consultative negotiations, and the d'sign and appsarance of the builaing, based upn the informal sketches submitted with this application.

9. ROC/038/84 RAYLEIGH. 28 (SITE OF 'TREEHURST'), WESTERN ROAD, RAYLEIGH.

Outline application to erect three detached houses and garages, including new access way.

Mr. P.D.Marriner, c/o John.H. Williams, Estate ¶Jouse, 377, Rayleigh Road, Eastwood, Leigh on Sea, Essex. Frontage: 4l.lm (l35ft.); Depth: 125m (4lOft.)

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSMJ FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:

1. The proposed dwelling on Plot 3 would constitute an undesirable form of backland development, and the creation of a "tandem" relationship between dwellings, resulting in excessive overlooking and loss of privacy to the occupiers of the dwellings on the Western Road frontage. 2. The erection of a dwelling on Plot 3, in close proximity to the northern boundary of the site, would necessitate the removal of existing trees and vegetation on the boundary and would thereby have a most detrimental effect on the privacy, seclusion and aspect of the existing dwelling, No.22, Western Road. 3. The erection of a dwelling on Plot 3 would produce an unduly crowded relationship between dwellings relative to the more spacious disposition of dwellings in Pendower, Western Road and Westview Drive. 4. The erection of two dwellings on the site frontage would unduly intrude into the setting and front aspect of 'Treehurst' and would place that dwelling in 'tandem' with the dwelling proposed on plot 1, contrary to the Local Planning Authority's adopted policy concerning backland developments, resulting in overlooking and loss of privacy to the property on the site frontage.

REPORT:

11 000471 The existing property Yrreehurst' is situated on a plot with a frontage to Western Road of 41.lm (135ft.) and a depth therefrom of almost 213.4m (700ft.). The existing house is set some 70.lm (230ft.,) from the road. The proposal is to create two building plots on the site frontage l8.2m (GOft.,) wide X 54.Bm (lSOft.) deep, together with a private drive leading to the existing house, and a further building plot at the rear l5.2m (5Oft.) X 70.lm (230ft.). Whilst I am not opposed to the principle of development or redevelopment of the site, the submitted application is out of character with the existing setting, and will create a "tandem" relationship between dwellings. The latter applies to the proposed dwelling at the rear, which would aslo appear cramped and intrusive on the neighbouring dwelling 22, Western Road. I am having discussions with the applicant's agents prior to the meeting, and will report any relevant considerations at the Committee. The following representations have been received:

'Kingsley Lodge' Pendower, Western Road: no specific objections but asks that the existing trees are saved; 20, Western Road: igain no objections but considers that trees should be retained and protected; 8, Western Road: Development undesirable and would be detrimental to the existing house and local environment;

'Foxley Court' Pendower, Western Road: Development could threaten trees on the southern boundary which provide an important screen to Pendower. New access being adjacent to Pendower would result in traffic and access problems;

28, Western Road: Development would spoil setting of 'Treehurst'; development close to northern boundary would overshadow and block light to side windows of No. 28; 22, Western Road: Development would intrude and detract from the amenities, setting and privacy of No.22; Rayleigh Civic Society: Consider it might be difficult to resist the two properties on the site frontage, but plot at rear is too restricted and access arrangements should be reconsidered.

10. ROC/169/84/CC CANEWDON. ENDOWED PRIMARY SCHOOL, LAMBOtJRNE HALL ROAD, CANEWDON.

Continued use of relocatable classroom.

12 000172 Essex County Council, c/c The County Planner, Globe House, New S Street, Chelmsford, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL: I recommend that no objections be made to this proposal.

REPORT: An application by the Essex County Council for the provision of a relocatable classroom on the site, to provide additional classroom facilities, was considered by the Development Services Committee on 23rd. January 1979, and no objections were raised to the proposal (Ref.CC/l6/78 refers). There are no objections from a Town Planning point of view to the County's proposal to renew planning permission for a further period, the existing permission having expired on 29th. February WS this year.

11. ROC/168/84/GD ROACH GROUP. WHITE CITY, FOULNESS ISLAND, SHOEBURYNESS.

Erect plant workshop and compressor house. Department of the Environment, do Property Services Agency, Goojerat Road, Colchester, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that no objections be raised to the proposal, and S that the Property Services Agency be informed accordingly.

REPORT:

This application is submitted under the provisions of D.O.E.Circular 7/77 — 'Development by Government Departments'. The proposal involves the erection of a flat roofed building 2.240m (7ft.) X l.790nt (5ft.6ins.) to house an existing compressor installation adjacent to an existing operational building.

12. A/ROC/26/83 RAYLEIGH.

13 000473 'LA ROMANTICA', 9, HIGH STREET, RAYLEIGH.

Add externally illuminated hanging sign. 'La Romantica' Restaurant, do T.J.Warner, 15, warwick Close, Rayleigh, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. The sign must not exceed 600mm. X 750mm., and shall be located in the centre of the panel indicated by the letters ABCD outlined in red on the plan hereby approved, and shall not be varied or altered in any way without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 2. The means of illuminating the sign shall be via two small tungsten halogen spotlights located on top of the black fascia positioned as indicated by the letters B and C on the plan hereby approved.

REPORT:

There are no planning objections to this proposal, subject to the suggested conditions, which are made on the specialist advice of the County Planner. The building is Listed Grade II.

13. ROC/074/84 ASHINGDON. LAND NORTH OF 457, ASHINGDON ROAD, ROCHFORD.

Erect three detached dwellings.

M.B.C.Limited do Paul Ellwood, 521, Galleywood Road, Chelmsford, Essex. Frontage: 31.5m (lO3ft.); Depth: 48m (lSBft.); Floor Area: ll5sq.m (1238 sq.ft.); Density: 8.1 d.p.a.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. sta. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 6 - A scheme of landscaping to be approved. 3. Std. Cond. $ — Submit materials schedule. 4. Std. Cond. 10 — Details of screening.

14 S 000474 5. Std. Cond. 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure. 6. Std. Conch 17 — Provision for vehicles leaving site in forward gear.

7. The route of the existing public footpath No. 7 shall be defined to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority as indicated on the submitted drawing No. 701/2 prior to the commencement of the proposed dwellings.

REPORT: This application, and the following proposal Roc/75/84, seek permission for a total of 5 detached houses with garages fronting Ashingdon Road between Nos. 457 and 469. A previous application to develop just two plots adjacent to 469 was refused on the grounds that two houses would appear out of place with the a existing bungalow No.469. Now that the applicant has control over a wider frontage I consider that a development of houses would be appropriate as it will achieve a run of properties with its own character, and will integrate with more varied house designs in the vicinity of No. 457. Public footpath No. 7 Hawkwell passes through the site, and the submitted plans show its route altered for a short distance where it emerges onto Ashingdon Road. At present the footpath follows an s-bend alignment abutting Ashingdon Road, although the official defined route of the path follows a straight line. The submitted application shows the footpath routed in a straight line, and so from a legal point of view no diversion of the footpath is involved. The occupier of 457 Ashingdon Road has expressed concern about the proximity and impact of the dwelling planned to abut his property, but since the receipt of his representations I have negotiated an amendment to the siting of the adjacent property to increase its side isolation with the boundary of No. 457 from 1 metre to 2.5 metres. The occupier of No. 469 Ashingdon Road raises no objections to the proposals.

14. ROC/075/84 HAWKWELL. LAND SOUTH OF 469, ASHINGDON ROAD, ROCHFORD.

Erect three detached dwellings.

M.B.C.Limited c/o Paul Ellwood, 521, Galleywood Road, Chelmsford, Essex.

15 0004fl Frontage: 21m (69ft.); Depth: 4am (l58ft.); Floor Area: llssq,,m (l238sq ft.); Density: 8 d.p.a.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. 6 - A scheme of landscaping to be approved. 3. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule. 4. Std. Cond. 10 — Details of screening. 5. $td. CowL 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure. 6. Std. Cond. 17 — Provision for vehicles leaving site in forward gear. 7. The route of the existing public footpath No.7 shall be • defined to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority as indicated on drawing No. 701/2, prior to the commencement of the proposed dwellings.

REPORT: Please refer to my Report on the previous schedule item No. 13.

15. ROC/073/84 RAYLEIGH. HIGHLANDS FARM, BEECHES ROAD, RAWRETH.

Outline application to erect a detached agricultural worker's dwelling. A.H.Philpot & Sons Ltd., Philpot House, Rayleigh, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 1A — Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. Std. Cond. 16 — Occupation of dwelling limited to person engaged in agriculture.

REPORT: Highlands Farm extends to a total of 222 acres, and is bounded by

16 I 000476 Beeches Road to the south and the River Crouch to the north. The applicants state that they have owned the farm for 3 years. of the 222 acres, 170 acres is cropped with arable crops; the remaining 52 acres of grass is used for the grazing of 60 18 month old heifers. Calf rearing is carried out in some of the old buildings on the site in the winter, but the original farmhouse on the farm no longer exists. The applicants are long established local farmers operating several other farms in the locality (including Dollymans Farm).Highlands Farm is situated at the northern end of Highlands Road, off Beeches Road, and the only other farm in Highlands Road is Pickerels Farm, upon which stands a farmhouse which is a listed building. The applicants state that because there is no residential accommodation on the farm severe vandalism has occurred, involving the tearing down of fences, gates being left open, arson, and the scattering of hay and straw. For these reasons they have applied for permission to erect a house to accommodate • an agricultural worker. Whilst the applicants are a well established farming company, and are anxiuos to make the farm more secure I have to say that I find the justification for recommending approval very marginal, bearing in mind that the farm abuts the built up area of Hullbridge. However, it seems to me that it would be difficult to effectively manage the farm and agricultural machinery from a dwelling in a residential street in Hulibridge. Because of this I feel, on balance, that there is a case to allow residential accommodation within the farm itself. The intended siting of the dwelling is served by an existing road and lies adjacent to existing farm buildings. The applicants suggest that there used to be a farmhouse on the site but that it was no more than a pile of rubble when they purchased the farm three years ago.

I 16. ROC/723/83 RAYLEIGH. 63, EASTWOOD ROAD, RAYLEIGH.

Change of use of part of site from tyre fitting depot to open car sales. Mr. K.E.Paget-Clark, do Lesters Commercial, 22/23 Duke Street, Chelmsford, Essex.

Frontage: 9.14m (3Oft.)'; Depth: 27.42m (9Oft.)

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The proposed use of this site for open car sales would detract A • 17 0004fl from the character and appearance of the area bordering an attractive public open space, and the Rayleigh Conservation Area.

2. The application site is of insufficient size to allow vehicles to enter,turn and leave the site in forward gear. 3. The proposal would result in increased traffic movements and inconvenience to residents in Stile Lane, together with noise and general disturbance associated with the use of this site for open car sales.

REPORT: The application seeks to use part of the existing Tyre Pitting Depot adjoining King George's Playing Field for open car sales. The application site is proposed to be screened from the existing yard by a l.52m (Sft.) high screen fence, with the existing fencing to Eastwood Road and Stile Lane replaced by a low post and chain fence. The application site has a maximum width ofonly 9.l4m (3Oft..) tapering to 7.62m (2Sft.) and a depth of 27.43m (9Oft. ). Whilst the County Surveyor does not object this is subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Parking provision for both staff and customers cars shall be provided within the site; 2. No vehicular access shall be permitted direct onto Eastwood Road; 3. All vehicular access shall be obtained via the existing right of way to the rear of the site; 4. Any parking facilities lost to the existing premises of No.63 Eastwood Road through this development shall be replaced. A shared access is shown to the site from Stile Lane, with communal car parking to serve the existing and proposed use. No objections to the proposal are raised by the Director of Health and Housing.

17. ROC/024/84 HULLBRIDGE.

"CRANLEY", TUE WALK, HULLBRIDGE.

Outline application to erect 5 detached dwellings and garages. Mr.E.Pinchback, c/o Mr.G.F.Clements ARICS, The Cottage, 43, Blackwell End, Potterspury, Towoester, Northants.

18 S 000473 Frontage: 24.Sm (8Oft.); Density: 20/Hectare (8/acre).

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: The Local Planning Authority is not convinced that the five dwellings can be satisfactorily accommodated on the application site. In particular, it is considered that the three proposed dwellings, with access from an extended Wallace Close, can not be satisfactorily accommodated in the manner shown without resulting in an unduly cramped form of development, with poor arrangements for private amenity space, and an unacceptably low level of privacy within the proposed development, and in the surrounding residential properties, resulting from overlooking to and from properties due to their close proximity.

REPORT:

The application site is presently occupied by a detached bungalow fronting onto The Walk, and contains several mature trees. The site adjoins three properties in The Walk, together with the Tyndale House housing scheme. Its eastern boundary adjoins the hammerhead end to Wallace Close, which has access onto Ferry Road. I have no objections in principle to the development of two dwellings fronting onto The Walk, but I have strong reservations over the proposed thrtee dwellings with access from an extended Wallace Close. Whilst recognising that there is a relatively high density of development existing in Wallace Close, I am not convinced that three properties can be accommodated in the manner suggested without resulting in a cramped form of development, • with poor privacy resulting from overlooking to and from surrounding properties. Members may consider that the development of the site with two dwellings fronting onto the existing Wallace Close would result in a more satisfactory form of development, though even here the rear windows of 20 Wallace Close would be Wa relatively near. The occupier of Crouch Lodge, The Walk has objected to the proposal, considering that there will be a loss of privacy.

20, Wallace Close: considers that there are parking problems in the existing Wallace Close, and that there would be a loss of outlook and wildlife habitat if the site is developed for housing. I am at present investigating the possibility of a footpath link between Tyndale House and Ferry Road and will report on this, and any further comments from surrounding residents, at the me ting.

19 O1&473 18. ROC/039/84 GREAT Wlsi(ERING.

63, HIGH STREET, GREAT WAKERING.

Change of use from shop to insurance and building society office.

Mr.A.W.R.Upjohn, 20, Victoria Drive, Great Wakering, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in 5 years. 2. This permission shall relate only to the use of the premises for insurance office and building society services, and for no other purpose, including any other purpose in Class 2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1972, without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 3. No advertisements shall be displayed on the exterior of the building without the consent in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 4. No illuminated advertisements shall be displayed so as to be visible from the exterior of the building.

REPORT The premises at 63, High Street, Great Wakering are Listed Grade II, and Members may recall that planning permission and Listed Building Consent to extend and refurbish this property were granted in November 1983 (Ref. ROC/672/83 and LB/25/83 refers). The premises have lain vacant for approximately 15 months, and the applicant now wishes to operate an insurance office, incorporating building society services. This type of use would be appropriate in High Street, Great Wakering as it proposes to provide a service to the public. There are no comments from the Director of Health and Housing, and no objections are raised by the County Surveyor.

19. ROC/042/84 RAYLEIGH. LAND ADJ.'TOPCROFT' (8), HILLVIEW ROAD, RAYLEIGH.

Outline application to erect one dwelling.

C.E.Bines and Son, 14, Sutton Road, Rochford, Essex

20 000480 Frontage:ll.5m (37'9"); Depth:29.Om (95ft.); Density:12.5d.p.a.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond.l - Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond.2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years). 3. The proposed dwelling shall be a bungalow design, with its roof ridge running at right angles to the road. No dormers shall be incorporated in the roof. 4. Std. Cond. 27A — Provision within curtilage of site for garage or garage space. 5. The proposed dwelling shall be set on a similar building line to the adjoining dwellings and shall provide a clear dimension of not less than 8.Sm (2Sft.,) between the rear wall of the proposed dwelling and the rear boundary of the site.

6. Std. Cond. 10 — Details of screening. 7. Std. Cond. 29 — Dwelling not to be enlarged or altered without prior approval. 8. Details of the intended methods for the disposal of soil and surface water drainage shall he agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the proposed dwelling is commenced.

REPORT: The site is an unused piece of land amongst a group of dwellings on plots of similar area. I am of the opinion that a dwelling of modest proportions could be successfully built on the land, and my recommendation includes a number of conditions aimed at ensuring that any dwelling adequately reflects the siting, amenities and scale of the adjacent properties. The following representations have been received from residents in the immediate vicinity:— 12, Hillview Road: Loss of light to side windows; loss of aspect and privacy; land should remain open as the ratio of buildings to open land is already too high and Rayleigh is a Conservation Area; road is private and unmade and unsuitable for additional traffic; main drainage may be inadequate. Similar comments are made by the occupiers of 'Topcroft' and 7, Hillview Road. The occupiers of 1 and 4 Hillview Road object on the grounds that the road is already in a deplorable state. Construction traffic would make the situation even worse.

21 gnni 20. ROC/049/84 ROCEFORD.

"BRANCH SURGERY", 1st. FLOOR, 115, SOUTHEND ROAD, ROCHFORD.

Change of use of 1st. floor accommodation from vacant residential to a doctor's branch surgery. Dr. Asim Kuinar Sen, do Mr. H.Pabial, 115, Southend Road, Rochford.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. This permission shall enure for the benefit of the present applicant, Dr. Asim Kumar Sen and his wife only. 3. The floorspace the subject of this application shall be used for a branch doctor's surgery and for no other purpose, without the prior consent in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 4. The branch surgery shall only operate during the following hours of 11.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon Monday to Friday.

REPORT: The applicant and his wife are both doctors, and currently run a surgery at 7A, Holt Farm Way in Ashingdon. Dr. Sen now proposes to run an additional branch surgery on the first floor of 115, Southend Road, Rochford, to serve those people around the Sutton Court Drive area who have difficulty in reaching any of the Rochford or Eastwood surgeries. Dr. Sen has amended the application in order that the branch surgery should operate between the hours of 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon Monday to Friday only, and he does not intend to operate an appointments system for just one hour per day. The first floor premises at 115 are currently vacant and the ground floor is a sub—post office. A separate external door has been installed, giving access to the first floor.

Nine neighbour consult'ations were issued.Mr. and Mrs. Gieland, of 117, Southend Road; V.M, and N.V. Patel of 121, Southend Road; and Mr A.B. Critoph of Boleyn Cafe, 127, Southend Road, Rochford, object to the proposal which they feel will aggravate problems of car parking in the lay-by outside Boleyn Parade. There are no objections from the occupiers of 111, Southend Road. The Rochford Parish Council and the Director of Health and Housing raise no objections.

22 000482 The County Surveyor raises no objections "....on the understanding that no parking for staff/patients is provided . within the site and that this practice will be for one doctor only, used between the hours of 11.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon Monday to Friday only." In view of the very limited hours during which this use would operate, and its nature,i.e. of service to a local community I recommend approval.

21. ROC/054/84 H{JLLBRIDGE.

54, WINDERMERE AVENUE, HOLLBRIDGE.

Demolish existing property and erect two detached houses with integral garages. A.W.B. (Builders) Ltd., c/o J.P,Leighton, Saltcoats House, Cutlers Road, South Woodham Ferrers, Essex.

Frontage: l8.lm(S9ftJ; Depth: 43m(l4lft.); Floor Area: 2x165m(l780 sq. ft.)

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. B — Submit materials schedule.

3. Std. Cond. l2A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Cond. 14 — l.Bm (6ft.) high fencing to be erected. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Orders 1977- 1981 there shall be no obstruction to visibility above a height of 600mm. within the sight splays hatched blue on the plan returned herewith. 6. Std. Cond. 34 - Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

REPORT: The site is presently occupied by a detached bungalow. To the immediate west is a detached house, while to the east (between the application site and the next nearest properties, a pair of chalets) there is a strip of vacant and overgrown land with a Gm (2Oft.) frontage onto Windermere avenue which I understand is within a different ownership.

23 The application site width is just below this Authority's normal standard for a pair of detached properties (59'4"), though this is so marginal that I do not consider that the proposal would look unacceptably cramped as a result of this. My main concern is with the frontage of the adjoining 2Oft. of vacant land, which is well below the width of plot required for a detached property.

Ideally, I would have preferred to have seen a developutent which combined both areas of land thus bringing this area of vacant land into use; the combined site being used for two properties on larger plots, or in principle being wide enough for three properties with a detached property on 3Oft. and a pair of semi- detached on SOft. This view was made known to the applicant's agent in discussion prior to submission. However, the land is not incapable of some use e.g. as a garden extension, and in such circumstances I consider that it may be unreasonable to withold permission for a proposal which in all other respects I consider to be acceptable. The occupier of 56, VJindermere Avenue has no objections to the proposal. The occupier of 52, Windermere Avenue is concerned over the loss of light which may occur to a side kitchen window from any development which takes place on the adjoining 2Oft. of vacant land.

22. ROC/058/84 ASHINGDON.

ST • ANDRSW' S CHURCH HALL, CHURCH ROAD, ASRINGDON.

Erect a detached store shed. 1st. Ashingdon Scout Troop, do t4.R.Hawes, 24, Clifton Road, Ashingdon, Essex.

RECOMMENDATIONt A?PROVALL SUBJECT TO: 1. std. Cond. 3 - Commence in 5 years.

REPORT: The proposal is to erect a small timber boarded shed, measuring 3.05 m. X 2.135 m. (10' X 7'), located behind the Church Hall and screened to the north and west by hedgerow trees.

23. ROC/09l/84 ROACH GROUP. "TYRELL, BARLING ROAD, BARLING.

24 000484 Eri .— r' •irii —, .7 r

Demolish existing property and erect one detached four bedroomed house. Mrs. S.Lagone, do J.R.A.Jackson, 78, Crescent Road, Leigh on Sea, Essex.

Frontage: 43m. (14lft.) Depth: 40m (l31'3").

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SiJBJECTTO: 1. Std. Cond. lA - Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 - Commence in 5 years.

3. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved. 4. Std. Cond. 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure. 5. Std. Cond. 17 — Provision for vehicles leaving site in forward gear. 6. Std. Cond. 27A — Provision within curtilage of site for garage or garage space. 7. This permission conveys no approval to the siting, design or plan form of the proposed dwelling shown on Drawing No. 169/3.

REPORT: This application is to replace an existing old bungalow with a two storey house. Whilst in the Green Belt, the site lies within a substantial ribbon of development where a number of new dwellings have been erected in recent years. The application site itself is flanked by modern two storey housing. Objections to the original proposals have been received from the adjoining occupiers of "Magna Point" and "Wyldings". Phase objections relate to:

1. Overlooking and loss of privacy; 2. The proposed house is excessive in height and size. The application has now been amended by the agent from a full application to an outline one, so that detailed consideration can be given to the siting, design, height and external appearance of the proposed house at a later date. Condition 7 has been imposed so that no approval is given to the indicated layout.

25 GGQS5 24. ROC/099/84/CC ROCHFORD. ROCHFORD HOSPITAL, ROCHE CLOSE, ROCFIFORD. I

Change of use from linen exchange to form day centre and workshop. Essex County Council, do The County Planner, Globe House, New Street, Chelmsford, Essex. Floor Area: Day Centre 142 sq m. (1528 sq.ft.); Aids Technicians 85 sq.m. (915 sq ft.).

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL. That no objections are raised to the proposed change of use, subject to the submission of further details of any proposed changes to the external appearance of the buildings. . REPORT: Essex County Council seek deemed consent under the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1976 for the above development. The proposal involves using the former linen exchange on the eastern side of Rochford Hospital as a Day Centre, and the former store as a new Aids Technicians Workshop. The proposal involves constructing small additions to the existing buildings comprising a lobby and store as well as creating new window and door openings. No details have been submitted of the changes in elevations but I hope to be able to show Members further details at the Committee. No objections are raised by the Rochford Parish Council.

25. ROC/l15/84 HAWXWELL. I SITE OF 22, YORK ROAD, ASHINGDON.

Erect two four—bedroomed detached houses with integral garages. Knolicray Developments,c/o Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 305, London Road, Hadleigh, Essex. Frontage: 18m.(S9sq.ft.); Depth: 46m. (l5Oft.); Floor Area: 2 X 155sq.m. (lG7lsq.ft.)

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

26 S 000486 2. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

3. Std. Cond. 12A - Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Cond. 14 — 1.Bm (6ft.) high fencing to be erected. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1977-1981, there shall be no obstruction to visibility above a height of 600mm. within the sight splays hatched blue on the plan returned herewith. 6. Std. Cond. 34 - Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

REPORT: The site is presently occupied by a detached bungalow. To the S west there is a detached house, and to the east a pair of W chalets. The plot is just under the normal standard for a pair of detached properties, of 6Oft, but within York Road there is a mixture of properties and I am of the view that the proposal would not look particularly out of place, or cramped in appearance. Letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of both adjoining properties: 24, York Road: considers that there will be a loss of light, view, privacy, and increased noise as a result of the development. 20A, York Road: objects on the grounds of loss of light to side windows, and has asked for greater separation at the boundary for the eastern of the two properties. Apart from the semi—integral garages which would come onto the a boundaries (in the case of the eastern plot near, but not W immediately opposite any major window of No. 20A) both the proposed dwellings would have, for the remainder of their lengths, the standard 1 metre separation.

26. ROC/122/84 RAYLEIGH. 1,TOTMAN CLOSE, BROOK ROAD INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAYLEIGH.

Construct access crossing and additional parking area.

Specialised Auto Services Ltd.,(address as application site).

27 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJEcT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 - Commence in 5 years. I 2. The parking area shall be hardsurfaced prior to the commencement of the proposed use. 3. The proposed area shall be used for the parking of staff and customer vehicles only, and shall not be used for open storage, including that of damaged vehicles. 4. Details of the cobbled area shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing with, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development, and shall be completed prior to the use of the site for parking purposes.

REPORT:

This proposal seeks to provide additional parking adjoining 1, Totman Close, by hardsurfacing the existing grass verge. Whilst the proposal results in the loss of a small area of landscaping it will ease parking problems experienced within this part of the industrial estate.

27. ROC/070/84 HOCKLEY. LAND SOUTH OF 66, WOODLANDS ROAD, HOCKLEY.

Outline application to erect new dwelling and garage. Woollaston Family Trust do M.Dunbar Associates, The Mill House Studio, Wethersfield Mill, Wethersfield, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Cond. 1 — Reserved matters to be approved. 2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. The proposed dwelling shall be of a single storey bungalow design.

4. The proposed dwelling shall be designed so that its forwardmost wall is set on a similar building line to the existing dwellings to the north, and provides adequate space for a tree of a size and species which shall previously have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to be planted in the position indicated by a green circle on the plan returned herewith. 5. The tree referred to in Condition No.4 shall be planted prior

28 1 090188 to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, and shall be replaced by a tree of similar size and species by the applicants, or their successors in title if, during the period of 5 years from the date of planting the tree is removed, damaged, becomes dangerous or diseased. Such tree shall be protected during the construction period by the erection of a chestnut paling fence in the position which shall previuosly have been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 6. Std. Cond.29 - Dwelling not to be enlarged or altered without prior approval.

REPORT: This application is the third attempt by the applicant to gain a planning permission for the erection of a dwelling on the site. The site is within the residential allocation in the Development Plan and the previous objections related to design and layout issues. The first application proposed a large four—bedroomed house set back beyond the general building line (Roc/590/82 refers). Following refusal of the application the applicant appealed, and in his decision letter the D.O.E.Inspector agreed that the sheer bulk and mass of the dwelling proposed would be visually obtrusive and unduly dominant, and that it would not fit in with existing developments. The Inspector also considered that there was no justification for including Green Belt land in the application site. The appeal was dismissed. The second application (ROC/8l3/83 refers) sought to overcome these objections by excluding the Green Belt land, setting tje house further forward on a similar building line to existing properties, and reducing the size of the dwellinghouse. This application involved the removal of a mature oak tree, notwithstanding action by the Council to preserve it by the issue of a Tree Preservation Order. Arising from this, the Council authorised the prosecution of each and every person responsible for the breach of the T.P.O., and the necessary notice to be served requiring the planting of a tree of a size and species as close as possible to the tree that was felled. (Minute No. 553 refers). The prosecution is proceeding. The application was refused in January this year on the grounds that the house proposed would be too dominant and cramped. An appeal has been lodged against the decision and the Council's statement os submissions has now been forwarded to the D.O.E. The current application is an outline submission, presumably submitted to obtain some form of permission and guidance from the Council as to the form of development that would be acceptable. Raving regard to the location of the site, the plot width, and the existing development in the vicinity, I consider that the

29 OO9g3 most appropriate form of development would be a bungalow set out on a similar building line to the existing dwellings. I have therefore recommended accordingly, and included conditions calling for a replacement tree to be planted in the same position as the tree that was felled. Local residents have been notified of the application, and a number of representations have been received from the occupiers of 46, 53, 54, 55, 62, 62A,and 65 Woodlands Road and 26 and 30, Claybrick Avenue. The general tenor of the representations is that permission should not be granted, with most residents expressing the view that the site should remain natural woodland, and that there is no need for further houses in the road. Most residents also express their deep concern concerning the destruction of the tree which the Council sought to protect. The occupier of 63, Woodlands Road has no objections to the proposal, and the occupier of 62A appears to share my view that if permission is granted it should be restricted to a bungalow, and also calls for reinstatement of the tree. I

28. ROC/845/83 ROACH GROUP. BARLING HALL FARM, LITTLE WAKERING ROAD, BARLING MAGNA.

Extraction of sand and gravel, and restoration work.

Cory Sand and Ballast Co. Ltd., Windsor House, 1270, London Road, Norbury, London.

RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL. That no objections be raised to the grant of conditional planning permission by the County Council in this case, subject to satisfactory controls over extraction and restoration being imposed.

REPORT: This application falls to be decided by the County Council, and is referred to Committee at this stage to enable the District Council's view to be agreed and passed to the County Council for consideration. The application site covers 23.37 hectares to the north of the existing sand and gravel workings at Barling Hall, and the proposals would extend the life of the workings by an estimated five years, including the facility to dispose of household waste and inert commercial wastes. It is proposed that the existing methods for handling the new material will remain unchanged, except that two dump trucks will be used to haul the gravel to

30 1 000139 the main plant hopper, in lieu of the fixed conveyor which will be dismantled. The thimp trucks will use the haul road on site. ' Restoration to agricultural use is proposed in liaison with the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Local consultations have met with the following responses: Roach Group Parish Council: does not object to the proposal, subject to all existing management controls being imposed. Roach Valley Conservation Zone Working Group: no objections subject to the County Council exercising planning and environmental health controls to manage the extraction of sand and gravel and the fill and restoration of the site. Director of Health and Housing: no environmental health problems are envisaged. Past problems of nuisance from flies appear to have reduced following improved tip management.

29. ROC/026/84/LB GREAT WAKERING. LITTLE WAKERING HALL, LITTLE WAKERING HALL LANE, GREAT WAKERING.

Refurbish and renew windows, repair walls, expose jetty timbers, demolish outbuildings, and erect new porch.

Richard Casleton, 76, Tyrone Road, Thorpe Bay, Essex.

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL.

REPORT This is a retrospective approval for Listed Building Consent for work which has already been carried out (satisfactorily).

30. ROC/604/B3 HOCKLEY.

THE ROSE GARDEN, ALDERMANS HILL, HOCKLEY.

Change of use from mushroom farm to private golf driving range.

Mr. T.C.Harrold, do Morton Middlebrook Consultancy, 63, Collingwood Road, Witham, Essex. Site Area: 5 hectares (12 acres ).

31 090491 REPORT: I refer to my previous reports to Committee regarding this I application, on 7th. February 1984 (Item 29) and 8th. March 1984 (Item 6 on the Agenda). I regret that I have been unsuccessful, to date, in arranging a mutually convenient time for Members to visit the site with the applicant. I will report any further progress made at the meeting. The following additional representations have been received from neighbours since my consultation letter dated 17th. February: Mr. Fearnley, 33, Aldermans Hill objects as: 1. the widened access will not have any material effect on an undesirable additional increase to the traffic problems that exist adjacent to the brow of a hill; 2. the proposal would result in an intrusion on his privacy. • Mr. R.E.Norton, 39, Aldermans Hill: still objects to the change of 'use. Mr. D.Turrell, 44, Aldermans Hill: continues to object as "there is no way that the incorporation of part of the small front garden of 35, Aldermans Hilt can really ameliorate the problems of access", being below the brow of a hill on a road with a high volume of traffic, the road safety implications are horrendous. Mr.S.E.Porter, 48, Alderinans Hill: still objects on road safety grounds. Mr.G.L.Hassee, Newlands, Woodside Road: objects on access and road safety grounds.

31. ROC/l29/84 RAYLEIGH. THE 'SILVER JUBILEE' PUBLIC HOUSE, EASTWOOD ROAD, RAYLEIGH.

Layout car park, form new access onto Eastwood Road, add beer store, bottle store, lobby and garage. Mr. A.R.Barthaud, do Mr. R.V.Horton, 72A, St. Andrews Road, Shoeburyness, Essex.

Floor Areas: Beer store:26.6sq.m.(286sq.ft.); Bottle store:27.Ssq.m.(296sq.ft.); Garage:20.4sq.m.(219sq.ft.)

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

32 I 000492 1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. 9 - Materials to match existing. 3. Std. Cond, 5 — A scheme of landscaping to be approved. 4. The proposed access and car park shall be laid out and surfaced entirely in accordance with the details shown on Drawing No. RH/P/l22 prior to the construction of the extensions hereby permitted. 5. The existing trees around the perimeter of the site shall not be lopped, topped or felled without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any tree removed without such consent shall be replaced with trees of such size and species as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

REPORT: This application forms part of a joint proposal which has been concurrently submitted to Southend Borough Council, as the site crosses the administrative boundary. The proposals within this bistrict involve demolishing the existing bungalow to the west of the Silver Jubilee P.H. in order to increase and improve the car parking provision within the site; to form a new access from the centre of the site to Eastwood Road, and to construct a beer store across the existing access to the western car park. The proposals in Southend's area comprise a new entrance porch, Dottle store, garage, and a small increase to the car park abutting Eastwood Brook. At present the grassed area around the existing bungalow is used as an overspill car park, and its attractiveness is being eroded by excessive use. Whilst the whole of the land within Rochford District is zoned for Green Belt, in my view these proposals . would have the following advantages: 1. the appearance of the area would be significantly improved; 2. access and parking would be improved and increased; 3. the demolition of the bungalow would widen the visual gap between the urban areas of Rayleigh and Eastwood. with regards to the development in Southend's area these are relatively small in size and are related to the design and appearance of the existing public house. I have therefore recommended that no objection be raised to these proposals. I have been liaising with Southend B.C. regarding these joint proposals and have informally agreed the above recommendation and conditions; the application will be reported to their planning

33 committee on 17th. April. Objections to the proposals have been received from the occupierS I of 449,451,and 457 Eastwood Road, as the site lies within the Green Belt and will create more noise and traffic hazards if the building is bigger. No objections are raised to the proposals by the County Surveyor and the Anglian Water Authority.

32. ROC/148/84 RAYLEIGH. LAND OPPOSITE 'GLENMOUWP', WARWICK ROAD, RAYLEIGH.

Erect four detached houses with garages, and removal of highway rights over part of Warwick Road.

Darrell Developments Ltd., 1, Hill Cottages, The Street, Woodham Ferrers, Essex. Frontage: Minimum ll.75m(38*6h), Depth: Minimum 2lm (68'9")

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL,SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved. 3. Std. Cond. l2A — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Cond. 13 — l.8m (6ft.) high brick screen walling to be erected. 5. Std. Cond. 14 — l.8m (6ft.) high fencing to be erected. 6. Std. Cond. 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure. 7. Details of the surfacing for the private drives shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development and shall be completed prior to the occupation of the proposed dwellings. 8. Notwithstanding the submitted plan, details of the siting, design and number of bollards proposed in Warwick Road shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development and shall be erected prior to the occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted.

34 I 000494 REPORT: This site has a long and detailed history, with a valid outline planning permission for four detached houses and garages ,ROC/232/8O. The detailed application was considered and recommended for approval by this Committee on 5th. January 1983, subject to a legal agreement requiring: 1. the closure of Warwick Road to vehicular traffic; 2. the provision of a footpath and landscaping within the highway;

3. the erection of bollards, prior to the commencement of development. In drafting the legal agreement it became apparent that an encroachment onto the Council's Grove Road public open space occurred when the land was cleared along the eastern boundary of the site. This discrepancy had apparently resulted from the • adjoining development being set out and constructed too far to the east by a distance of approximately 4.0 m.(l3ft.). The present application site now reflects the true ownership of the applicant with no encroachment onto Council owned land forming part of the Public Open Space/Green Belt. Because of the reduction in site frontage the development proposes smaller sized dwelling units (of the same style and character of the adjoining development) arranged in the same configuration as the former detailed application. Plot 7 has been moved further to the south, utilising part of Warwick Road, over which highway rights are proposed to be removed. Provision is made on the plan for access to Glenmount should it be re- developed in the future. The views of the County Surveyor have been sought and will be reported verbally at the meeting.

1 recommend that the applicant be requested to enter into a legal . agreement covering the same points as that previously drafted on application No. ROC/232/BO, which has been withdrawn.

Once planning permission is granted the applicant may then seek the consent of the Secretary of State to the extinguishment of this part of Warwick Road as a highway under Section 212 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.

35 OOO49i DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS

I have decided the following planning applications in accordance with the policy of delegation and subject to conditions:—

APPROVALS

ROC/768/83 Add rooms in roof and detached garage at 203 Lower Road, Hulibridge, Essex — Mr. Malcolm Weidner.

A/ROC/27/83 Erect free standing aluminium direction sign at Queensway, 1 agnolia Way, Purdeys md. Estate, Rochford. Essex — Harris Queensway. ROC/841/83 Alterations to shop front at 38 Ashingdon Road, Rochford, Essex — Mr. D. Carter.

R0D/844/83 Alterations to shop front at 40 Ashingdon Road, Rochford, Essex — Mr. D. Reeves.

ROC/884/83 Temporary siting of residential caravan at Plots 32 & 33, Creekview Avenue, Hullbridge — Mr. D. Walshe.

ROC/846/83 Add two storey rear extension at 60 Princess Gardens, Rochford — Mr. E. Galer.

ROC/85l/83 Demolish detached garage and add single storey rear and side extensions at 40 Hambro Avenue, Rayleigh — Mr. & Mrs. Fletcher.

ROC/795/83 Outline applioation to erect detached house at land adjoining 277 Little Wakering Road, Little Wakering, Southend on Sea — Mr. & Mrs. C G Pltkin.

A/ROC/3/83 Erect illuminated fasoia and directional signs at Purdeys Industrial Estate, Rochford, Essex — NFl Furniture Centres Ltd.

A/ROC/l5/83 Internally illuminated projecting box sign and internally illuminated fascia sign at International Stores Limited — International Stores Limited.

ROC/534/83 Alterations to shop front exit/entrance at International Stores Limited — International Stores Limited

ROC/8l4/83 Erect 2—bedroom detached house at 9 St. Thomas Road, South Fanibridge — Ms. Susie Bowers

ROC/854/83 Add front and rear extensions at Banjo Lodge, The Common, Gt. Wakering — Mr. Barton

c "nt' d

000496 2.

ROC/865/83 Add single storey front end rear extensions at 81 Main Road, Hockley, Essex — Mr. I. Stone

ROC/639/82 Erect a two storey side extension at "Jay—Marl", 27 Western Road, Rayleigh — Mr. Gerry Hagan

ROC/871/83 Add two storey side extension and ground floor garage and integral workshop to rear at 138 Hockley Road, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. S. Poyser

ROC/7l0/83 Add rooms in roof, and re—roof as existing at The Steelaway, Rawreth Lane, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. D.W. Howe I

ROC/69/84 Add single storey extension to front at 9, Burnhsin Road, Hullbridge — Mr. H. Grant

ROC/47/84 Demolish existing garage, add single storey side extension incorporating garage and porch at 1 Trinity Close, Rayleigh — Mr. J. Eaton

ROC/76/84 Add single storey side extension at 14 Monkeford Drive, Hullbridge — Mr. & Mrs. A. Brown

ROC/l05/84 Erect 2 metre high wooden boundary fence at 87 Conway Avenue, Great Wakering, Essex — Mr. K.C. Marston

ROC/63/84 Add single storey side extension and integral garage at 70 Weir Gardens, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. J. Roberts ROC/lli/84 Add rear conservatory at 2, Lower Lanibricks, Rayleigh Mr. A.G. Davison

ROC/32/84 Provide vehicular access at 4, Stasnbridge Road, Roohford, Essex — Mr. W. Fulcher

ROC/53/84 Add single storey side extension including integral garage at 19, Station Crescent, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. J. Lane

ROC/l37/84 Add garage and single storey extension to side at 23, Woodlands Avenue, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. M. Sharp

ROC/82/84 Add single storey side extension at 5, Spa Close, Hockley, Essex — Mr. Martin

ROC/64/84 Add conservatory to rear at 30, Orchard Avenue, Hockley, Essex — Mr. V.G. Ward

ROC/l4l/84 Add conservatory to front at "Harcourt Lodge", Rayleigh Downs Road, Eastwood, Essex — Mr. & Mrs. D. Sass

000497 3.

ROC/67/84 Add single storey rear extension and add front porch at 18 Windsor Way, Rayleigh — Mr. I.S.W. Smith

ROC/92/84 Add annexe to existing dwelling at "The Firs Nursery", Barling Road, Little Wakering, Essex — Mr. & Mrs. D.J. I-lines

REFUSALS

ROC/840/83 Add single storey side extension at 283 Plumberow Avenue, Hockley, Essex — Mr. Christopher Evers

Reason: 1) M.G.B.

2) If the proposal were to be permitted, a substantial proportion of the structure would be constructed in permanent materials, with a series of flat roofs, and the local planning authority are of the opinion that they would find it difficult to resist pressure on the foreseeable future to permit the flat roofs to be replaced by pitched roofs. The overall appearance and character of the original building would thereby be changed by a degree which the local planning authority considers to be unacceptable in the light of its present policies.

3) The further increase in the amount of flat roofs as proposed would create a building of totally unsatisfactory appearance, out of character and, out of proportion to the original dwelling, and would be visually intrusive in the Metropolitan Green Belt.

ROC/557/83 Raise roof height, add new pitched roof and single storey rear extension at 117 Plumberow Avenue, Hockley — Mr. E.L. Baker

Reason: 1) The proposal is unacceptable by reason of the unsatisfactory appearance of the extended dwelling and the materials used in the external construction. Also, insufficient information has been submitted to enable the Local Planning Authority to give due consideration to the effect the proposal would have upon the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining dwellings, and the provision of car parking facilities within the site.

cont'd.. 4.

ROC/861/83 Outline application for dwelling at The Bungalow, Rayleigh Downs Road, Rayleigh, Essex — Carol Ann wright

Reason: 1) The site is outside the areas allocated for development in the Approved Review County Development Plan and furthermore is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt approved as part of the Essex Structure Plan which indicates in Policy 5.9 that, within the Green Belt - permission will now be given, except i-n very special circumstances for the construction of new buildings or for the change. of use or extension of existing buildins (other than reasonable extensions to existing dwellings) or for purposes other than agriculture, mineral extraction, or forestry, small scale facilities for outdoor participatory sport and recreatic institutions in large grounds, cemetries, or similar uses which are open in character.

The proposal is contrary to this policy. 2) The proposed dwelling would result in the loss of car parking provision to serve the existing use.

ROC/35/84 Extend first floor to front and rear and small extension to existing ground floor side at 34 Kings Road, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. G.R. Baker

Reason: 1) The proposed dormers are considered to be excessive in size and would be detri- mental to the elevations and character of the existing propery and the balanced form and composition of 34 and 36 Kings Rd. Rayleigh.

Furthermore, the proposed dormers would be an unduly prominent and incongruous feature in the street scene.

2) The proposed dormers are considered to be excessive in size, detrimental to the outlook and amenity of the adjoining occupiers of 32 and 36 Kings Rd., Rayleigh.

ROC/3O/84 Outline application to erect detached thatched house and garage at land adjoining 159 Greensward Lane, Hockley, Essex — Mr. S. Shelley

Reason: 1) M.G.B.

2) The proposal would result in an undesirable consolidation of the existing sporadic development in the road and would create a precedent for similar developments to the detriment of the rural ch'acter it it a A fl D UUUkOO of the locality. DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATIONS DECISIONS

IN THIS SESSION. DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPR0VALS4c4Oft

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

83 /88lA 72, High Road, Hockley. Extension at first floor level. 83/1097A 31, St. Johns Road, Gt. Waicering. Restructure of roof and re—tile. 83/11354 119, Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh. Rear extension and front porch. 83/ll45A New Hall Nursery, Lower Road, Erection of new greenhouses with Hockley. covered way and re—position shop. 83/ll57A 62, High Street, Gt.Wakering. New shop front and access stair. 83/1174A 120, Lt. Wakering Road, Alterations and additions, incorporatin Gt. Wakering. 2 storey extension to the south flank. 84/8 44, Trinity Road, Rayleigh. Alterations and two storey side extension.

84/31 "Shiralee", Mount Bovera Lane, Hawkwell. Single storey rear extension. 84/68 11, Totman Crescent, Rayleigh. Internal alterations. 84/69 2, Rawreth Hall Cottages, Rawreth Lane, Rawreth. Room in roof. 84/70 19, Station Crescent,Rayleigh. Ground floor kitchen and garage extension. 84/75 33, High Road, Rayleigh. Re—roofing. 84/77 48, Philbeck Crescent, Rayleigh. Cavity wall insulation. 84/81 97, Richmond Drive, Rayleigh. Single storey extension at rear. 84/104 55, High Road, Rayleigh. Convert part bedroom into bathroom and add porch. 83/61A Plots 1—5, inc., Daws Heath! Erect 5 detached 4 bedroom houses and Castle Road, Rayleigh. garages. 83 /964A 80, Lt. Wakering Road, Ut. Internal alteration to kitchen and Waker ing. shed into kitchen. 83/11 5OA 26, Golden Cross Road, Ashingdon. Garage. 83/12O3A 21, Love Lane, Rayleigh. Rear and side extensions and garage. 84/15 30, Pevensey Gardens, Add single storey rear extension and Hullbridge. detached garage. 84/2 1A 80, Orchard Avenue, Hockley. Conversion of garage to dining room and covered way. 84/25 226, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh. Erection of 1 x 4 bedroom chalet with garage. 84/26 230, Hockley Road, Rayleigh. Underpinning. 84/45 104, Hatfield Road, Rayleigh. Internal alterations. 84/55 34, Rayleigh Avenue, Eastwood. New opening through wall. 84/67 Croc's Club, 19—23, High Street, Rayleigh. New light and ceiling fittings. 84/79 9, Burnham Road, Hullbridge. Extension. OO5O1 DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPROVALflflnEJQS PLAN NO. -- ADDRESS ij 84/80 6, York Road, Ashingdon. New toilet and shower room. 84/83 "Maywin", Hambro Hill, Rayleigh. Rear addition. 84/87 195, Eastwood Road, Rayleigh. Re—roofing and rear gutters. 83/931 "Luss House", Canewdon Road, Ashingdon. Room in roof. 84/94 28, Great Eastern Road, Hockley. Additions. 84/95 148, Conway Avenue, Gt. Waker ing. Porch. 84/99 46, Conway AVenue, Gt. Wakering. Cavity wall insulation. 84/100 12, Waxwell Road, Hullbridge. Cavity wall insulation. 84/108 Mallaig, Lower Road, Hockley. New flat roof to existing garage. S 84/109 Mallaig, Lower Road, Hockley. Single storey extension at rear. 84 / 110 lA, Broadlands Avenue, Hockley. Cavity wall insulation. 83/850A 78, High Street, Rayleigh. Internal alterations to ground and first floors to enlarge banking branch.

8 3/6 31 Acacia House,2 East St., Extension to exist.building ac#czçe 84/82 34 Rayleigh Ave. ,Rayleigh Rear conservatory 84/74 Grange free Church London Rd. Erect. ext. to Church premises Rayleigh 84/120 26 Golden Cross Rd.Ashingdon Proposed additions 84/6 2 38 Teimouth Drive.Rayleigh Rear extension 84/114 9 Reycroft Rd.Hawkwell Two storey ext. to side. 84/124 Mount Bovers Parm,Mount Dover Rrb. to side of property Lane, Hawkwell .

39 Marylands Ave. ,flockley Rooms In roof & replacement of part 83/1006A of side. 84/96 248 Eastwood Rd. ,Rayleigh G.Ploor side ext.& conservatory 83/1114 Shangri La,Lower Rd.Hockley Rear bedroom extension 83/lll2A 28 Nonlcsford Drive, Hulibridge 2 storey side extension 83/374A 247 Ashingdon Rd.Rochford Side extension 84/83 6 Goldsworthy Drive.Gt.Wakert g Double storey side extension 83/1196 35 Clifton Rd. Ashingdon Repairs to foundations 65 Goldsworthy Drive.Gt.Wáker rig Cloakrcom,attached garage & utility 84/12 room to rear.

84/76 24 New Rd.Gt.Waicering G.P. ext. & alterations 84/101 441 Ashingdon Rd.Roohford Proposed additions Ext. & alterations 83/860A 'Nibkitt' Wellington Ave., I HuJ.lbridge 000 StJ2 DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPROVA TJxEflEW3fl -. rPLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

84/5 8 l6 Roohford Hall Close.Rochfor Rooms in roof

82/244 New House Farm, Poynters Lane.. Detached House & Garage. (flelexatio Great Wakering

84/i50 Rarcourt Lodge, Rayleigh Downs Road, Eastwood. Conservatory.

84/154 140, Lower Road. Hulibridge. Cavity Wall Thsultion.

84/158 16, Tudor Way, }tawkwell. Conservatory.

84/i6o 17, Viotor Gardens, Hawkwell Lounge Addition.

84/i 61 173. Main Road Hawkwell. Cavity Wall Insulntion.

H *1 • 84/166 26, Albert Road. Rayleigh U It 84/i 69 14, Helena Close Hockley. It If

84/163 53, Warwick Road. Rayleigh Car Port.

84/il? 214. Eastwood Road. Rayleigh Enclose Front Porch, Rear Extion. & Alterations.

84/i 39 11, Sutton Road, Roohford, Rear Extention.

84/86 1. Trinity Close, Rayleigh Replacement Garage & Extention.

84/78 Crystal Vale, R0wreth Lane. New Roof,to Garage & Porch.

84/s9oA. 1. The chase, Ashingdon Rear Extention,

84/i 35 121, High Road. Rayleigh. Alterations & Additions, • 19. Kimberley Road, Great Waker ng. Rear Extention & Internal Alteratic 34/142 51, Banyard Way, Rochford. Extention to forth Kitchen/Diner, 84/146 11. Twyford Avenue, Gt. Wakerin : Bathroom. - Clematia, Barrow Hall Road. 84/112 Rear Fxtention, Darling. 84/5i 15, St. Andrews Road, Rochford. New Gerage Front & Rear Porches. 34/128 99, Clarence Road, Eayleigh, Rear E2xtention & Garage.

84/i 19 11. Oakwood Road0 Rayleigh. Roof Conversion

84,' 7A 26, Curtis Way, Rayleigh, Retr Dormer Extention,

84/162 42, Windermere Avenue, 1-I/B. Rerr xtention, . 84/122 80, Conway Avenue, Gt. Wakering Lounge Extention & Porch. 84/85 27A, Plumberow Avenue, R/Ley. Alterstions & Additions to form Bedroom & i&ithroom. (Approve & Relkx) DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION - —

84/9 51, Windermere Avenue, Add dining room, dormer windows arid Hulibridge. car port. 84/10 5, Folly Lane, Hockley. Rear dormer and loft room extension. 84 /12 65, Goldsworthy Drive, Cloakroom, attached garage and Gt. Wakering. utility room to rear. 84/14 Banjo Lodge, Common Road, Rear and front first floor extension Gt. Wakering. and porch. g4 /27 76, Canewdon View Road, Single storey rear extension and rooms Ashingdon. in roof space.

84/57 26 Curtiaway, Rear dormer extension. Rayleigh. 84/56 28 Cedar Drive, Hulibridge. Rear ground floor extension. 84/53 Plot 10 Wedgewood Way, Rt'ection of detaohed honee (ipe K), . Hilltop Pam, Ashingdon. with integral garage. 84/5 2 86 Parklands, Rochford. Internal alterations and garage/work- shop. 84/50 34 Kings Road, Rayleigh. Extension to ground and first floor. 64/49 Adj. 199 Southend Road, Construction of a two bedroomed Rochford. bungalow and detached garage. 84/48 30 Glebe Drive, Rayleigh. Side single storey extension.

84/47 122 Louis Drive Weat, Single storey rear extension. Rayleigh. 84/46 5 Silverdale, Rayleigh. Kitchen extension/utility room, new internal partition and opening. 84/39 10 Rookery Close, Rayleigh. E tension. . 84/3 5 46 York Road, .Lshingdon. Demolish bungalow and erect detached house.

84/32 31 Dowrthall Road, Rayleigh. 2 Storey Rear Exteñtion and store.

jc\qs e"0't7' —. a '1 tP

ROCHFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL . Minutes of the Council At a Meeting held on 11th April 1984. Present: Councillors Miss B.C.J. Lovett (Chairman), 0.13. Alger, R.H. Boyd,, W.H. Budge, T.H. Burt, Mrs. LIM.A. Campbell—Daley, Mrs. P. Cooke, L.K. Cope, B.A. Crick, E.E. Daley, R.D. Foster, LA. Gibson, B.T. Grigg, P. Owinnell, Mrs. P.R. Hawke, Mrs. E.M. Heath, D.R. Helson, Mrs. Jo Jones, Mrs. J.M. Munson, 3.5. Nokes, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, R.T. Stephens, C. Stephenson, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor, ES. Whitworth and D.C. Wood.

Ayologies: Councillors M.N. Anderson, T.L. Dean, Mrs. J. Fawell, T. Fawell, A.J. Harvey, M.J. Jones and T.J. Warner.

287. MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of 13th March be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

288. CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Chairman mentioned that Councillor Stephenson's wife was in hospital for an operation and Members joined with the Chairman In wishing Mrs. Stephenson a speedy and complete recovery.

The Chairman reported on the success of the "Night of the Stars" Concert at the Mill Hall on February 12th, which had been organised by Mrs. Donice Childs of the Rayleigh Operatic and Dramatic Society in aid of the MSPCC's Centenary Appeal. The function had raised £363.73 for the charity.

The Rayleigh Operatic and Dramatic Society had also achieved success in winning an award for their performance of "Gipsy Love" at the Mill Hall and had received a silver salver and an illwninated address which it was intended to display at the Mill Hall.

The Chairman also referred to those Members of the Council who would not be seeking re—election in May. She expressed her thanks to Councillors CR. Alger, N.R. Blyther, E.E. Haley, R.T. Stephens, T.3. Warner and R.S. Whitworth, all of whom had served the interests of their local community on the Council for the last four years.

She made special mention of Councillor A.L. Tate, a senior Member and former Council Chairman, who would be retiring after 18 years' service with th former and present Councils. Over the years Councillor Tate had made a real and valued contribution to the work of the Council and he would be greatly missed by his colleagues, both Members and Officers. . Council

Councillor Tate replied by saying how much he had enjoyed his service with the Council and the pride he felt in its achievements. He congratulated Councillor Miss B.C.J. Lovett on her outstanding year of office as the first lady Chairman of the District.

Similar sentiments were expressed by Councillor E.S. Whitworth and in a letter from Councillor T.J. Warner which was read on his behalf by the Vice—Chairman of the Council.

289. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

Resolved (I) that the Minutes of Committees be received and the recommendations contained therein adopted subject to the amendments shown.

(2) that the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to any docunents necessary to give effect to decisions taken or approved by the Council in these Minutes:—

Committee Date Minute Nos.

Health & Housing Services 20th March 203—218

Leisure Services 22nd March 219—240

Resolved that Councillor R.A. Pearson be recorded as apologising for non—attendance.

Development Services 27th March 241—255*

Fambridge Works — South Fambridge (Minute 202/84)

A Member mentioned that it had been announced at the Development Services Committee that the owner of the Works had deposited his contribution of £20,000 towards the road construction costs. (4267)

Finance & Personnel 28th March 256—267

Policy & Resources 3rd April 268—279

Public Meeting — 20th March 1984 Proposals for the use of the former }TocklCounty Primary School land and buildings (Minute 273/84)

On a motion to adopt the recommendation, it was —

Moved by Councillor B.A. Crick, Secondd by Couneillor iLl!. Boyd, that the following instructions should be added to the recommendation in order that the Council's representatives at the proposed meeting could have precise guidelines for the discussions, a w 000506 Council

"(a) That the representatives should establish the extent of resources available to the Action Committee — (i) to assist them in meeting the cost of acquisition. (ii) proposals as to which buildings they would seek to use. (iii)their resources f or management of the site. (b) The Council's requirements for their management of the Hockley Woods be incorporated in the school site. (c) The Council should seek a meeting with the Hockley Parish Council. (d) A report to cone back to Policy & Resources Committee'. Members debated the amendment with the balance of opinion being in favour of not restricting the areas of discussion but rather to allow the Council's representatives to pursue all avenues available and that a report would be made in the course of events.

On the amendment being put to the vote by a show of hands, it was declared LOST.

Pursuant to a requisition under Standing Order 14, voting on the amendment was recorded as follows:—

For the amendment (7) Councillors C.B. Alger, R.H. Boyd, B.A. Crick, P. Owinnell, D.R. Helson, J.E. Nokes and C. Stephenson.

Against the amendment (22) Councillors W.H. Budge, T.H. Burt, Mrs. L.M.A. Campbell—Daley, Mrs. P.Cooke, L.K. Cope, E.E. Daley, R.D. Foster, J.A. Gibson, B.T. Grigg, Mrs. P.E. Hawke, Mrs. E.M. Heath, Mrs. Jo Jones Miss 8.0.3. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, R.A. Pearson, J.A. Sheaf, R.T. Stephens, A.L. Tate, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor, E.S. Whitworth and D.C. Wood.

The amendment was declared LOST.

Planning Services 10th April 280—286

* Minute 255/84 was amended by Minute 270/84 of the Policy and Resources Committee of 3rd April 1984.

290. R'ORT OF HACKNEY CARRIAGE PANEL — 4TH APRIL 1984

Consideration was given to the appended report of the meeting of the Hackney Carriage Panel held on 4th April recommending that the Council adopted the Southend—on—Sea Borough Council's tariff for Hackney Carriage fares with effect from 1st May, 1984.

DQt3U7 Council

Resolved that the report be received and the recommendations contained therein adopted. (897) (SEC)

291. DAY CENTRE, BACK LANEJ ROCIIFORD (Minute 752/83)

The Chief Executive reported that tenders for the above scheme were due for return by the 9th May and sought the Council's approval to the acceptance of a suitable tender under the Standing Order 18 procedure.

Resolved that arrangements be made accordingly. (4322) (CE & SOL).

I .

.

. 'OOO313 ROCHFORO DISTRICT COU?TGIL

COUNCIL MEETING — 17TH APRIL 1984

REPORT OF THE HACKNEY CARRIAGE PMIEL

At a meeting held on 4th April 1984 Present: Councillors A.L. Tate (Chairman), T.Fawell, AJ. Harvey, N.J. Jones, C. Stephenson and D.C. Wood.

Apologies: Councillors Miss B.G.J. Lovett and R.A. Pearson

1. HACKNEY CARRIAGES— PROPOSED INCREASE IN FARES (Minute 172/84)

The Secretary to the Council reminded the Panel that, having heard the views of the Rochford Hackney Carriage Drivers Association, they had decided at their meeting on 9th February last to recommend an increase in taxi fares as set out in Appendix A hereto. This would have meant a departure from the Council's policy established over the years that the fares in Rochford and Southend should be the same, as the Southend on Sea Borough Council had already adopted the fares structure shown in Appendix B hereto.

In coming to this decision the Panel had in mind that the introduction of the flat rate charge after the first mile would have the advantage of simplifying the tariff and that the removal of many of the extra charges would be welcomed by the public and would reduce the effect of the increased fare for mileage.

As reported to the Development Services Committee, having given public notice of the new tariff, 14 letters of objection were received from the taxi operators and drivers in the Rochford part of the District, together with a more detailed submission of the case. The Panel had been convened to hear these representations.

The grounds of objection were as follows:—

(1) They were not consulted.

(2) The increase on the second, third and fourth miles (the most frequently used journey distances) from 5Op. to 80p. per mile is 60%, which is unreasonable.

(3) Passengers taking a Rochford taxi from Rochford to Southend will pay more (SOp. to 60p. than vice versa) thus causing public opinion to sway in favour of Southend taxis for journeys from Rochford to Southend and return.

(4) The new Southend Hackney Carriage tariff is preferred.

A letter was also received on behalf of 22 of the Rayleigh and Hockley operators and drivers supporting the recommended fare increase. Mr. 3. Charters and Mr. B. Pettit on behalf of the objectors then joined the meeting.

It was stressed that the Council had consulted the Rochford Hackney Carriage Drivers Association which it had believed was representative of the views of the trade in the District as a whole. The objectors advised that communications within the Association must have broken down.

in support of their case and in response to questions from the Panel, the objectors explained that the journey by taxi to Southend was the single most popular fare for Rochford Drivers and that it was at the distance of 4 miles that the difference between the proposed fare and the Southend tariff was greatest. It would mean that it would be cheaper for a Rochford resident to call a Southend taxi. They also emphasised that moat fares were for single passengers and the effect of the increase would not be reduced by the removal of the extra charges. It put them at a disadvantage. They agreed that a flat rate tariff was attractive but argued that a major review of the fares structure would be necessary in the next few years in any event and now was not the time to take this step. They accepted that once out of the District they could offer a discounted fare but said that from the point of view of public confidence, it was preferable that the correct fare appeared on the meter.

The objectors having left the meeting, the Panel examined graphs prepared by the Chief Trading Standards Officer of Southend on Sea Borough Council comparing the proposed ochford tariff with the Southend tariff and showing that for short journeys of up to 2 miles and for journeys of over $ miles, there was little difference between the two tariffs. In the middle ground however the difference ranged between 2Op and 5Op.

The Panel believed that the fears expressed by the objectors were valid and that they also had to consider the advantage to the passenger of the Southend tariff. They therefore agreed to recommend the Council to introduce the Southend fare structure as shown in Appendix B with effect from 1st May 1984.

They also considered that the arrangements for consultation with the trade should be changed to ensure that all operators have the opportunity to comment.

Finally, whilst accepting that 1984 was not the time, they could still merit in the introduction of a flat rate tariff and agreed to commend to the Council that this should be the main principle in the next review. RECOMMENDED (1) That in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976) the authorised fares for Hackney Carriages and those private hire vehicles fitted with meters in the Rochford District be increased as set out in Appendix B with effect from 1st Nay 1984.

(2) That in future all operators be consulted on the review of the tariff for Hackney Carriage fares. a 000510 (3) That the introduction of a flat rate tariff be agreed as the main principle of the next review of Hackney Carriage fares and that the Southend on Sea Borough Council be advised accordingly. (897)

2. TRANSFER OF PLATE

Resolved that the transfer of Hackney Carriage Licence No. 18 from Hr. Taylor to Mr. Barnes be approved. (897)

000311 £ITh A

ROOBfl)ItD DISTRICT CODNOIL

HACKNEY CAEUIIAGES PrQposed Fare Increase

Dietan and Time For the first mile or the first ten minutes (or a combination of parts of such distance and time) £1.00

For each additional i6 mile or each one minute (or a

combination of parts of such distance and time) 5p

Chaç NO EXTRA charges in respect of luggage, animals and additional persons.

NO ADVANCE booking charge.

Pot hirings begun BJ2J3W1EN IO.OOp.m. and 6.OOa.m. and also on. SUEDAYS

and Bank Hofldara exoept dtzring the Christmas and New Year periods

as detailed below. 30p

For hirings begun BEYPWIIEM 1O.OOp.m. on the 24th December and 6OOa.m.

on the 27th December and BPWEIHU'1 10.OOp.m. on the 31st December and 6.OOa.m. on the 2nd January Double Pare (excluding extras) A'PEWfl B

SOUTEThD ON SEA. BOROuGH CO1JNCIL

HACKNEY OAX?BIAGES

Authorised. Pares

Distance and Time

For THE RCRST mile or the first twelve minutes (Or a combination

of parts of such distance and time) 90p

I For EACH LIIDITIONAL 12 mile or each one minute (or a combination of parts of such distance and time) until a fare of £2.70 is shown on the taxi meter

I For EACH ADDITIONAL '16 mile or each 40 seconds (or a combination

of parts of such distance and time) after a fare of £2.70 is

shown on the taxi meter. 5p

Extra Charges

For hirings begun BIIflIWFEN 10.OOp.m. AIW 6.OOa.m. and also on

SUNDAYS and BaziIc Holidays except during the Christmaa and New Year

periods as detailed below. 30p

For hirings begun BWPWEEIST IO.OOp.m. on the 24th December and 6.OOa.m.

on the 27th December and BFJ!WffiT 10.OOp.m. on the 31st December and 6OOa.rn. on the 2nd January. Double Pare (excluding eras

For EACH ARTICLE OP LtJGAGE conveyed OUTSIDE the passenger

compartment of carriage 5p

OOO13 . For EACH MIIMAL carried lOp

For EACH PERSON IN EXCESS OF O1E (one or two children tnder ten years to ootint as one person) lop

'Where the hirer arranges IN .AJ)WTOE by letter, telephone or otherwise with the proprietor or driver prior to the commencing of hiring for hire of the carriage to commence from a stated

place other than a hackney carriage stand. iSp

S

. 000514 r r ' 'flrp

ROCUFORI) DiSTRICT COUNCIL S bftnutesoftheplanninç Services Committee At a Meeting held on 26th April, 1984. Present: Councillors R D.Foster (Chairman), C.B. £lger, M.N. Anderson, R.fl. Boyd, W.H. Budge, Mrs. t.M.A. Campbell—Delay, Mrs. P. Cooke, L.1C. Cope, B.A. Crick, E.E. Daley, T.L. Dean, J.A. Gibson, B.T. Grigg, P. Gwinnell, A.J. Harvey, Mrs. P.E. Hawke, D.R. Tielson, Mrs. Jo Jones, Miss B.OJ. Lovett, Mrs. J.M. Munson, J.E. Nokes, J.A. Sheaf, C. Stephenson and A.L. Tate.

4poles: Councillors R.A. Pearson, B. Taylor, J.P. Taylor, T.J. Warner, E.S. Whitworth and D.C. Wood.

292 MINUTES

Resolved that the Minutes of the Meeting of 10th April, 1984 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

293 !O0SEYS NURSERY, SOUTHEND ROAD, ROCHPORD (Minute 631/82)

The Solicitor to the Council and the Director of Town Planning reported that planning permission for the erection of a greenhouse, sales office and store shed on this relatively small nursery site was granted subject to completion of a satisfactory Legal Agreement restricting the sales in the main to goods grown on the site.

The Agreement had yet to be concluded as the operation of the nursery had since changed because the owner had been unable to retain the services of the person who had cultivated the flowers, plants and shrubs on site. The owner was now seeking the freedom, within the terms of an Agreement, to continue trading in thjs way, rather than he restricted to selling items which, in the main) were actually produced on the site.

The owner was also seeking to utilise the "growing area" at the rear of the site, which was in the Airport flight— path, for displays of shrubs and bushes. This would appear to be contrary to the restrictions applicable to the flight— path in that it encouraged more persons within this area.

The Director of Town Planning was concerned that if goods sold were not restricted in the main to the produce of the site, there would be an intensification of retail use, which might result in the site being used as a retail shop, which use would be unacceptable within the Green Belt. The operation had started in anticipation of the Agreement and there had not been any traffic problems or difficulties with the items being offered for sale. Nevertheless, the site was on an extremely busy toad and its limited size left serious doubts that the operation could be self—sufficient for the sale of produce grown predominantty on the site. Without adequate safeguards, therefore, the possibility would remain that the use might change to that of a normal retail outlet which would put pressure on adjoining areas of land Planning Services

for similar consideration.

The Committee considered that the Legal Agreement as originally proposed was still required to control the situation and that enforcement action should be taken against those activities on the site which were being carried on without the benefit of planning permission.

Resolved that the applicant be given the opportunity of completing the Legal Agreement along the terms indicated by the Solicitor to the Council within an extended period of 4 weeks, failing which the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to take such action as may be necessary including the service of Court proceedings and Enforcement Notices relating to the use and development carried out on the site without the benefit of planning permission. (137l6)(DTP & SOL)

294 VARIATION OF PLANNING CONDITIONS TO APPLICATION ROC/543/83 APPROVED 6TH OCTOBER 1983— RELIANCE FARM, VANDERBILT AVENUE, HULLERIDGE ROAD, RAYLEIGH — ERECT STABLE BLOCK AND TACK ROOM

The Director of Town Planning reported that the above application had been approved subject to a number of conditions and the completion of a Legal Agreement. In order to prevent a commercial use of the stables or their sale separately from Reliance Farm, the conditions, inter alia, would restrict the use of the stables to horses belonging to the applicant and his immediate family only.

The applicants were concerned that the value of the property would be devalued unreasonably if a successive owner was prevented from using the stables unless a fresh planning permission was granted.

Neither the Director of Town Planning nor the Solicitor to the Council had any objection to successors in title to the property using the stables so long as the entire holding remained within the ownership of the occupiers of Reliance Farm.

Resolved that Conditions 2 and 4 be amended as follows:—

"(2) This permission shall enure for the stabling of horses belonging to the applicant Mr. A. Tilson and his immediate family only or for any successors in title of Reliance Farm subject to any provisions which may be included in other conditions attached to this permission regarding the extent of land within the control of the applicant or sucessors in title."

"(4) This permission is granted on the understanding that the application site and the area of land coloured blue on the revised submitted location plan, dated 19th September 1983, is and remains in the ownership of and control of the applicant and any successors in title of Reliance ifarm. If separate ownership of any of the above land occurs the stables shall cease to be used unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority." (25574)(DTP & SOL) 000516 I1 'P"iip. •.. — rw "IP" ¶1'1' .q spur w q Planning Services

295 APPEALS DECIDED, APPEALS LODGED AND TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

The Committee noted the information as set out In the Agenda.

296 ROC/604183 — CHANGE OP USE PROM MUSHROOM FARM TO PRIVATE GOLF DRIVING RANGE — THE ROSE GARDEN, ALDERMANS HILL, HOCKLEY

The Committee considered the appended report of the Director of Town Planning.

Members were reminded of the involved planning history of this site which had resulted in this aplication to regularise a use which had previously occurred.

A site visit had taken place where the applicant outlined his proposals fully, and also the objections being raised by adjoining residents. To deal with those points he suggested that safety netting be placed not only alongside the proposed "pitch and putt course" but completely along the boundary of the site adjoining the rear gardens of properties in Bullwood Approach.

The floodlights were to be directed away from the Aldermans Hill, properties and an undertaking was given as to use of the range only between the hours of 9.00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m. The applicant was agreeable to erecting fencing to prevent persons straying from the Woods into the range and for no buildings to be erected or placed on the site, other than those referred to in the application, without the express consent of the local planning authority.

Members thought the car parking provision might not prove adequate and suggested traffic management at the entrance would help prevent parking in flullwood Approach.

Members were very concerned with the access from Aldermans Hill but noted the views of the Highway Authority that the proposed increase in width of approximately one metre would make this adequate. The applicant had agreed that no use whatsoever would be made of the site, not even by his personal friends as happened at present, until such time as the additional access width had been achieved and all works, including the resiting of the telegraph pole on the footway had been completed.

Resolved that the application be approved subject to the prior completion of a Legal Agreement to ensure the access works were completed prior to use of the site, the erection of safety netting and fencing, restrictions as to opening hours and as to the erection of additional buildings and siting of floodlights to ensure as far as was possible that no nuisance was created to adjoining residents.. (ROC/604/83)(DTP & SOL)

000S17 Planning Services

297 ROC/038/84 — 28 (SITE OP "TREEHLJRST") WESTERN ROAD, RAYLEIGH — OUTLINE APPLICATION TO ERECT THREE DETACHED HOUSES AND GARAGES INCLUDING NEW ACCESSWAY — MR. P.D. MARRINIER, C/O JOHN H. WILLIAMS, ESTATE HOUSE, 377 RAYLEIGH ROAD, EASTWOOD, LEIGH—ON—SEA, ESSEX.

The Director of Town Planning reported that further to Minute 286, Para. 9/84, the Chairman and the Ward Members had visited the site and that the owner was now considering submitting an application for a single dwelling to be erected on the site. Members considered the proposal to be acceptable in principle and authorised the Director of Town Planning to determine an application subject to him being satisfied with the location of the proposed unit and to details.

Resolved that the Director of Town Planning be authorised to determine the application accordingly. (ROC/038/84)(DTP)

298 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND RECOM?4ENDATIONS

The Director of Town Planning submitted a schedule for consideration and a list of applications decided under delegation.

Resolved that decisions be made in accordance with the recommendations in the appended schedules, subject to;—

Para. l—ROC/085/84 Para. 2—ROC/l12/84

Applications deferred for clarification of the proposals of East Hawkwell Working Party for a children's play area on this site.

Para. 3 — ROC/O96/84

That the application be granted subject to the completion of a Legal Agreement to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council.

Para. 4 — ROC/031/84

Application deferred for further report on the trees on the site.

Para 5. — ROC/050/84

Application deferred for clarification of the measurements of the site.

Paras. 10,11 and 12 — ROC/828/83, ROC/078/84 & ROC/O79184

That the applications be granted subject to the completion of Legal Agreements to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council. . 000513 W Planning Services

Director of Town Planning to report to the Development Services Committee on the provision of a lay—by in Southend • Road in the vicinity of these developments.

Para 16.— ROC/214/84

Director of Town Planning authorised to determine the application subject to confirmation that the Anglian Water Authority had no objection.

Para 17. — ROC/770/83

Application granted subject to the completion of a Legal Asreement to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council to ensure the residential use of the house on this Industrial Estate would not recur.

299 25 — 29 WEST STREET, ROCHEORD

The Committee noted a report on the progress of enforcement action regarding the above premises which were in the process of being sold. (9856)(DTP)

300 ANGLIAN WATER - CUSTOMER CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES

The Chief Executive reported that with the change in the membership of Water Authorities separate arrangements were to be made for the representation of consumers' interests. So far as Anglian Water was concerned, six Customer Consultative Committees were to be established for the Divisions of its area. Rochford District was within the Colchester Division.

Membership of the new Committees which would meet twice a year included one representative from each of the County and District Councils in the Division. Provision was also made for representation from the Essex and Suffolk County Associations of Local Councils) the Water Companies, trade and commerce, industry, agriculture and household consumers.

* RECOMMENDED That the Chairman of Development Services • CommitteeThe nominated to serve on the Coichester Customer Consultative Committee of Anglian Water. (715)(SEC)

301 81013—ACCESS TO SOUTHEND

The Chief Executive reported that the County Council was arranging a Member—level meeting with Rochford and Southend— on—Sea on the afternoon of Monday, 21st May 1984, to explain the "feasible options" for the scheme which, if they were approved by the County's Planning and Highways Committees, would form the basis of an exhibition and public consultation exercise in July.

The District Council had been invited to appoint representatives. After consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Chairman of the Development Services . Committee, it was 0095 tO kannThg Sezvicee

* RECOMMENDED That the Chairman of the Council and the Chairmen of the Development Services, Planning Services and Policy & Resources Committees, together with Councillor K.!!. Boyd, be appointed to represent the District Council at the above meeting. (45)(SEC)

* NOTE: The Chief Executive exercised his powers under 5.0.18 to give immediate effect to these two recommendations which would not admit of delay.

302 APPLICATION ROC/186/84 — ERECTION OP 11kV OVERHEAD LINE AT AVIAflOIflTh't, woop The Committee agreed the re—routing of an overhead line and the laying of an underground cable to the Old Westcliffiaris Rugby Club headquarters.

Arising from the consideration of this application, the Director of Town Planning was authorised to approve any future applications for re—routing of electricity supplies particularly those to be placed underground.

(ROC/186/84)(DTP) - 303 EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

Resolved that, in accordance with Section 1(2) of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960, the public be now excluded from the meeting for the reason that publicity would be prejudicial to the public interest, the business about to be discussed being the subject of confidential reports.

304 ROC/70/84 — OUTLINE APPLICATION TO ERECT NEW DWELLING AND GARAGE ON LAND SOUT}U)F 66 WOODLANDS ROAD, BOCKLEY (Minute 286L para 27/4)

The Committee considered in confidence a report of the Director of Town Planning and the Solicitor to the Council reminding them that they had decided to defer the above application pending the outcome of an appeal lodged against the refusal of an application for one house on this site.

The applicant had contended that the outline application for a bungalow was an attempt to reach a compromise, that it was strictly in accordance with the points made in the previous appeal and that approval of the current application would not prejudice the Hearing regarding the disputed Tree Preservation Order.

Resolved that the outline application be approved, subject to th following conditions:—

1. Std. Cond. 1 — Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. The proposed dwelling shall be of a single storey bungalow design. . 0005 Planning Services

4. The proposed dwelling shall be designed so that its forwardmost wall is set on a similar building line to the existing dwellings to the north, and provides adequate space for a tree of a size and species which shall previously have been agreed in writing by the local planning authority, to be planted in the position indicated by a gree circle on the plan returned herewith.

5. The tree referred to in Condition No. 4 shall be planted prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, and shall be replaced by a tree of similar size and species by' the applicants, or their successors in title if, during the period of 5 years froni the date of planting the tree is removed, damaged, becomes dangerous or diseased. Such tree shall be protected during the construction period by the erection of a chestnut paling fence in the position which shall previously have been agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 6. Std. Cond. 29 — Dwelling nqt to be enlarged or altered - without prior approval. (ROC/70/84)(DTP)

009521 ROCHEORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

PLANNING SERVICES COMMITTEE —26TH APRIL1984

REPORT OF TUE DIRECTOR OF TOI'JN PLANNING

ROC/604/83—CHANGE OF USE FROM MUSHROOM FARM TO PRIVATE GOLF DRIVIN RANGE. THE ROSE GARDEN, ALDERt4ANS HILL, FIOCICLEY, ESSEX

The above application has been deferred several times to enable a mutually convenient site meeting to be arranged and this should take place before consideration on 26th April 1984.

This site has a long and involved planning history of which most members are aware. To summarise briefly, the site was until recently in use as a Golf Driving Range and has been the subject of an Enforcement Appeal to terminate the unauthorised use. Two previous applications to use the site as a Golf Driving Range were refused planning permission on 2nd October 1981 (ROC/672/81), and on 11th March 1983 (ROC/273/82) with reasons for refusal based on the following points: —

(i) The unsuitability of the site for this use bearing in mind its location within the Green Belt and the Roach Valley Conservation Zone.

(ii) The narrowness of the existing access.

(iii) That the proposed use would lead to pressure for intensification.

(iv) That there was insufficient provision for the parking and turning of vehicles.

(v) That the use would adversely affect neighbours by reason of glare, noise and general disturbance associated with the use.

The applicant whilst originally appealing against the Enforcement Notice withdrew his appeal and agreed in writing to remove all signs and to terminate the unauthorised use of the site from 1st October 1983. He further agreed not to re- commence the use until:—

(a) a new access to Aldermans Hill had been achieved; (b) permission is granted either by Rochford District Council or by the Secretary of State on appeal; and (c) to enter into a Legal Ageement regarding the use of the site. (See appended copies of correspondence).

In my view the paramount objection to the site's use as a Golf Driving Range is the access. The present application has therefore sought to overcome this objection by including part of the front garden of 35 Aldermans Hill within the application site, with the appropriate notice being served on the owner. However, if the access can be made technically acceptable this could lead to further intensification on the site if not conditioned and controlled adequately by legal agreement. U'0E12 The County Surveyor has been consulted regarding the revised access arrangements and confirms that these are satisfactory subject to compliance with certain conditions. However, if permission is granted the applicant would need to acquire this land before the use could commence.

The Chief Executive of Essex County Council has been consulted under the Paragraph 19 procedure and has stated that determination of the application is left to the discretion of Rochford District Council, who will no doubt take into account effects on residents, the Roach Valley Conservation Zone and to ensure that ancillary buildings are kept to a minimum in this Green Belt location.

The Nature Conservancy Council have expressed the following reservations to the proposal:—

(1) The site is small and this could lead to golf balls being driven into the preserved wood.

(ii) The use of floodlighting would disturb animal life in Hockley Woods.

The Director of Health and Housing states that noise from the car park and glare from the floodlights could give rise to nuisance to adjoining residents. However, conditions could be imposed to minimise this possibility.

Objections to the proposal have been received from the following local residents;—

Mr. Fearnley 33 Aldermans Hill Mr. R.W. Mountney 33B Mr. R.E. Norton 39 Mrs. B. Mann 35 Mr. R. Blacknell 3 Mr. J.R. Boreham .5 Mr. H.J. Acketts 19 Mr. 3. Bishop 21 Mr. P. Turrell 44 Mr. S.E. Porter 48 The Occupier 50 Mr. C.P. Johnson 58 Mr. P.3. Claydon 24 High Road Mr. & Mrs. Esther 2 Gay Lawns, Woodside Road Mr. Gd.. Hassee Newlands, Mr. A. Payne Treetops, Bullwood Approach Mr. C. McDonald Secretary, Hockley Ratepayers Assocn.

Letters in support have been received from: Mr. B. Beeching Levante, Woodside Road Mr. 0. Ilummings 12 Hillside Road

a

000523 ti41.ir !1fl j grar-

Technically the revised proposal overcomes the previous direction of refusal on access grounds by the County Surveyor. This is a material factor in any appeal and was reflected in my previous recommendation to Committee.

however) other material considerations are important:—

(i) Would the existing access be acceptable even if widened?

(ii) Would there be pressure for intensification if permission is granted?

(iii) Could the local authority satisfactorily control the use of the site?

(iv) Would the use of a legal agreement be appropriate in these circumstances?

Director's Conclusions

if the Committee is satisfied with the revised access arrangements and that a legal agreement can be used to control the uses and intensification on site my recent recommendations for approval would be appropriate. The legal agreement would restrict the use of the site to a Driving Range (with a specified number of tees) and to a Pitch and Putt Course, with no other facilities. In these circumstances my previous recommendation is repeated below.

D.T.P. — GRANT PERMISSION SUBJECT TO:—

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. The existing access shall be widened to a width of 5.5m. (18'O") for the first l5.5m. (51 ft..) and shall be provided with a 9.Om. (30 ft.) wide dropped kerb crossing prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted.

3. The widened access shall be surfaced and screened in accordance with a scheme which shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to the commence- ment of use hereby permitted.

4. Details of the existing and proposed golf driving bays shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the use.

5. Details of the existing and proposed floodlights shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of use. The floodlights shall be designed so as to prevent glare to . ajoining residents. OOU24 6. Notwithstanding the submitted plan, the siting, layout and surfacing of the proposed car park and turning area shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of use.

7. Details of any changes in ground level shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of use.

8. NotwIthstanding the submitted plan, details of safety netting including positions, height and type shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Such netting as agreed shall be erected prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted.

9. The proposed golf driving range shall only operate during the hours 9.00 am. — 9.00 p.m unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

10. This permission does not relate to the use or conversion of any building on the site as an administration and refreshment centre.

11. No outside broadcasting of any music or announcements shall take place from the site.

12. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved.

13. The existing woodland the subject of Tree Preservation Orders 14/49 and 2/79 shall not be lopped, topped or felled without the prior consent in writing of the local planning authority.

Nevertheless the above recommendation was a cautious one and would have been accompanied by a full verbal presentation at Committee and included a suggestion for a site visit. Should the view be taken that even if widened the access is unacceptable and the Solicitor to the Council is not satisfied that a legal agreement to control and ensure its implementation and the other uses on the site, then planning permission should be refused for the following reasons and all necessary action taken to prevent its use.

1. The site is outside the areas allocated for commercial purposes in the County Development Plan and, furthermore, it forms part of the approved Metropolitan Green Belt. The written Statement accompanying the County Development Plan indicates that in order to achieve the purposes of the Metropolitan Green Belt, it is essential to retain and protect the existing rural character of the areas so allocated and that new buildings and uses will only be permitted outside existing settlements in the most exceptional circumstances and when essential for agriculture or allied purposes. . 000325 ' 9 ¶111

Furthermore the site lies within an area which has been designated as the Roach Valley Conservation Zone by Rochford District Council where its values for conservation, its archeological and historic feature will be safeguarded.

2. The use of this site as a Golf Driving Range has a detrimental effect on the surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise and general disturbance associated with the use together with glare from the existing floodlights. The proposed expansion and consolidation of this unauthorised use would significantly add to the problems already encountered,

3. The use of the restricted access onto Aldermans Hill 111013 for commercial purposes would result in conditions of danger and obstruction to other road users in this heavily trafficked road contrary to the interests of highway safety.

• 4. The proposal would lead to pressure for further intensification and changes of use which would have an unacceptable impact on the environment and would lead to additional traffic generation contrary to the interests of highway safety.

.

. 000526 S

IC/SBC/ROC/604/83

Mr I Cpbell. Ext.3309 13th September 1983

Dear Mr Harrold, The Rose Garden — Inftrcement Notice the loctl planning authority is pleased with your offer to close down the range to the public and remove all signs relatinr- to the rarc-'? and I confirr that the 1st October 1983 is an acceptable date for tne inmie— mentation of this offer.

Fran your point of view, the practical way to denonstrate your good intent is for you now to tell the Department of the Lnvironnient of this turn of events and explain that it will no longer be necessary to continue with your appeal against the Enforcement Notice because you are going to comply with it ano cease operations as Iron 1 st October. For clarification, I confinn that your own privatr use for olf practise would not be considered a breach of the Enforcement Notice and neither would use by your personal V rienoc.. However, a in all sueL case&, it is a matter or tact arid degree ar to when the point i reached that there isanateria]. chanFe or use. I an sure that, with your experience1 you know where is the break—point but 1' you are in nn doubt at any time please contact me. ROC/604183 is the key to all this. If it is approved, it will override the Enforcement Notice. If' it is not approved, you will be able to appeal and have clear-cut arguments for decision.

Because of all this, I do not propose to continue work on the local planning authority Rule 7 statement for the Local Inquiry scheduled for 18th October next. I em grateful that neither the local planning authority oor yourself need be put to continuing trouble and expense and hope that a way will be found for you to put your land to a profitable and acceptable use. To assist, I am sending copies of our correspondence to the Department of the Environment. Yours sincerely, T C liarrold Eag the Rose Garden AThenians Hill HOCKLEY Essex Jf Director of Legal Services. OOO 527 S c,t¼au\ Akttsa 4 kcxb &4

. tç%CA\\tM

OO52g —' ii'

.C4 \L \cC\\0Y . C) Q$ç e

\$cm \c\&aA \ L, ccc)L. "'it & .

c_ .

. 000529 COLIN P. SIVELL FCIS.DMt.Dip.O&ll. Barrister—at—Law. Director of Legal Services.

Tel: Southend 54636u

My Ref. IC/JJ/47h3 a ROC/604/q3 'four Ref. Dealt With b Mr. I.Camphell Ext.330) ti Snntenar 1 wmr

Dear Mr. tliddlehrooh,

appeal by Mr. T.C. 1-larrold, The Rose Gnrder. Alderman 11111, Hocklev

I refe to the nforcement 9otice issued t}itn October 13", a-i kn4al apaiitat which is to heard at a Local Inanir" ort the lift' °crob- next.

I note that on the 15th August 1981 von huhnitted c revile' a-inlicntIon for the change of use. Teat apnlication indicate- v t-iterr to rovie an access chat would meet the requirement of the 114 ohwav Authority althouu no details are shown as to how tii 1 to e achieved.

urther, I a-i told that you client has verbally of'nrel to sluir 'cnr' tee onerarion of the golf drivin; rancte unt-LI cticn a accesc jn arhtevraA on cue 'round.

The new application arid the offer of tee un4erta1zin' rase reØ' lqcue w)urn arionid be oronerlir exo) ore t?' th' inca1 1annzr" autinritt -i would tc preparer to an tee l,cnartraen OL th Lnviron—i°n to nfln1r, the Local Inquiry pend1n determination of WK'/5O4f' provide4 hat before so doing l receivi a written, hin-lin'- undertitinr that tri use will cease in tee interin and will not reconnence without nlanpn-ir permission, whethcr ttranted by the local planninc' authority or by the Secretary of State on appeal.

It would help consideration of the anplication if your c1ienr were to indicate a willinctness to enter into a tesa1 coverirr the followiu noint3

(a) lb intensification of' the sae or development beyond that indicate'i n' R3C/6O4/S without specific oeniqioct fro'i the local piarinini- authorttv.

Morton Middlebroak Consultancy, cc. TVl. 9arroV, 'arj., b3 Colliucçwood Road, The Rose Cnnien, tIT1lAH1 Aldernane lull1 Essex CW- ZEE H1'KT , tsqe" ef, __ C4,, Z.Cr, flfl' Ons? (b) No use of trte aite until there has been constructed an accest to the satisfaction oi the Highway Authority.

(c) Access to be gained only fro klderirans Hill.

Tx ic aptnrent that. there wilt alr.n neec1 to be a ftrthe' annlicntinr for tI-t" hull,iirw operations both nianned an a)readv crrIe1 our iqel;llin9, inter alia, the drivin" ban, the liithtin no4ts inclu'Iinr de.tailq 0F the itluninition, tht ca oar, the conversion worc to r'cistin'- huildines, the safet nrttinr, the pitc' ar& mitt cnnrsc an' the ho%Ir of openinj.

I offer rn' nersonal oninion that subtticIpsi o' tjaq etrtj3n will materially assist in consiceration of tnv ap-)1lcatto-' 5O ye 'nec thc chancez of the Planning Serviceq Com'uittee Jeferrin th€ ntonosal until such details are received. To surnarise — (1) The local nlannin authority woul' arree tn a defernent of the Local Lnquiry if given a suitable undertaking. (2) An ofter to enter into a Legal Agreement rrn'ri future ust oul' hem the local planninc authority and, I nugget your client. (3) Determination of ROC/6O/i/33 would he assisted by early sttrnjscjon o details.

I believe that the apnroach 1 now sugest does nor, involve any extraordinar'' or oneroue burden on your client but oeet indicate a way forward. However, notniru itt this letter Ir Intended or sbo'tlri he t.-iken as implvtnr an" fetterinu of the discretion of tie local rlnnnine authority to deternine a n1annin anp(tcation on it nttt'..

1iecause of the nearness of deadlines for the Lace' tin ir' ' voul' Inn nlease' for an early renlv a-id, to aqsi't, I have d.llverer1 ii cony of tniq letter direct to votr client. Yours sincerely, •

For Director of Leial 5eryices

ooofl . — — — ]I1 1 rpuni JIlI!11 l P I!I I ip'sji v'' uic —

]WELO}MBNT CO1TRDL APPLICATIONS CCXMSIDEBED

DURING- ¶EIS SESSION.

000532 PLANNflIG SERVICES CONMITTEE.

26th. APRIL 1984. — SCHEDULE INDEX.

ITEI APP.NO. SITE ADDRESS OFFICER

1. 85/84 'NINTON HEIGHTS', HILLTOP FARM, HMVKWEIL

2. 112/84 PEASE 5, HILLTOP FARM, HAWKWELL

3. 96/84 SHORBTIRY NURSERY, WAKERING ROAD, GREAT WAICERING SG

4. 3 1/84 'GLENNOUNT', WARWICK ROAD, RAYLEIGH REP

5. 50/84 LAND NORTH OF VANDERBILT AVEUE, JEF RAWRETH

6. 103/84 METHODIST CHURCH, EASTWOOD ROAD, 3W RAYLEIGH

7. 104/84 8, MATFIELD Al/IRTUE, HULLBRIDGE PCC 8. 135/84 LMTD .ADJ. 199, SOUTHEND ROAD, 3M ROCEFOPI)

9. 162/84 HOME FARM, 46, HIGH ROAD, HOCKLE! T?ThI

10. 828/83 LAND REAR OF 43—49, SOUTEEN]) ROAD, BRP HOCKLEY

11. 78/84 45/47, SOUTBIND ROAD, HOCKLEY REP

12. 79/84 43, SOUTEEND ROAD, HOCKLEY REP

13. 145/84 60—62, HIGH STREET, RAYLEIGH SG

14. 165/84 38, GRAERE AVENUE, HUILERIDGE P00

15. 212/84 LAN]) (PLOT 4) THE AVENUE, HJJL]IBEIDGE FCC

16. 214/84 30/31, CPJESKVIBM AVENUE, EITLLBRIDGE P00

17. 770/83 14A RAWBETH INDUSTEIAI ESTATE, TNM RAWRL'PH

18. 101/84 'TEE BEEHIVE', 12, SOUTH STRHE2, HOCEFORD

19. 86 5/83 RAMBETE GARAGE, OBEU'JZFOBD ROAD, JBP RAWRL'TH S 000533 PLANNING SERVICES CONICTTE2I.

26th. APRIL 1984.

1DULE OP DEVELOPbTMT APPLICATIONS, WITH DIREOTOR' S REQ ONMDATIONS, IDR DETERMINATION AT THIS COMMITTEE.

1. ROC/085/84 HAWEWELL.

'NINTON KEIGHTS', HILLTOP FARM, ASHIMGDON.

Erect sixteen houses and eleven bungalows with integral garages and one treble garage.

N.B.C. (mailders Ashingdon) Ltd., 0/0 Abbotts, 22, South Street, Roohford, Essex.

Site Area:l.2 heotares (3 acres).

RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std.. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 4 — Hedgerows to be retained.

3. Std. Cowl.. 6 — A scheme of landscaping to be approved,

4. Std. Ccnth 7 — All trees, shrub and hedges to be protected by fencing.

5. The proposed screen walls and fences as indicated and specified on drawing no. BC 3356 la shall be erected prior to the occupation of the proposed dwellings.

6, Std, Cond. l2A. — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

7. Std. Cond. 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure.

8. Std. Cond. 26 — Estate road to be completed before development commences.

9. Details of the proposed finished surface of the access ways intended for adoption other than roads and mews and mews courts shall be sub- mitted to the Authority for approval prior to the erection of any of the dwelling units proposed to have access therefrom. All statutory undertakers' services shall be laid prior to the commenoe— went of any works of construction on the said access way; thereafter these works of construction shall proceed in such a manner as to ensure that each of such dwelling units, before it is occupied, shall

(') 1 OOO534 be served by a properly consolidated and surfaced means of access between the dwelling and the existing hghway. The final finished surface of the access way shall be laid within three months of the completion of all dwelling -units obtaining aocess therefrom or within any such extended period as may be agreed by the Authority.

10. A 2.1 metre x 2.1 metre pedestrian visibility splay, relative to back of footway/highway, should be provided on both sides of all vehicular accesses and no obstruction above 600 mm in height should be permitted within the area of the splays.

11. \there the surfaoe finish of private drives are intended to remain in unbound materials the first six metres, as measured from the back of the highway, should be treated with an approved surface dressing to avoid the displacement of loose material onto the highway.

REPORT:

This application and the following item application no. RO0/l12/84 are detailed submissions for further sections of the Hilltop Pam Estate between Wedgewood Way end Albert Road. Both follow the pattern of the adjacent sections of the estate in terms of house types, layout and density. Outline planning permission for the development of these areas end separate approvals for the roads and sewers were granted in 1976, (Roo/228/73).

In considering previous detail submissions, the question of the provision of open space/play areas within the estate has been raised. No specific requirement for open space was made in the original outline planning permission and the provision of childrens play spaces has not been pursued because of the character of the estate which in the main, comprises detached dwellings on quite generous plots, with private garden areas, well in excess of the minimum 100 sq. metres.

The Essex Design Guide states with regard to childrens play space, that the best place for small children to play is in a back garden where they can be supervised without anxiety. The minimum garden area standard of 100 sq.m. has been designed to meet this requirement. The adopted policy in the Guide calls for the provision of conveniently located play spaces only where a significant number of dwellings have garden areas below the minimum.

The Essex Design Guide Estates Household Survey supports this policy.

There is need for adequate public open space provision located within reasonable walking distance of housing areas, and the adequacy of e4sting provision not only in Ashingdon, but the 4istriot as a whole is bestj\ examined in the preparation of the Draft District Plan.

. 2. o00335 2. ROC/l12/84 EM)KWELL.

PLOTS 227—295 HILLTOP FARM, ASHINGDON

Construct estate roads and sixty nine houses with garages,

Comben Group PLO., 1, Portland Square, Bristol, B82 8DB.

Site Area: 3.07 heotares (7.58 acres); Density: 9.1 d.pa.

RB] OMMENDATION; APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 4 — Hedgerows to be retained.

3. SM. Cond. 6 — A scheme of landsoaping to be approved.

4. Std. Cond.. 7 — All tree, shrub and hedges to be protected by fenoing.

5. The proposed screen walls and fences as indicated and specified on drawing no. S 392 05 C4B shall be erected prior to the occupation of the proposed dwellings.

6. Std. Cond. 12A — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

7. Std. Cond. 15 — Details of walls, fences or other means of enclosure.

8. Std. Cond. 26 — Estate road to be completed before development commences.

9. Details of the proposed finished surface of the access ways intended for adoption other than roads and mews and mews courts shall be submit- ted to the Authority for approval prior to the erection of any of the dwelling units proposed to have access therefrom. All statutory undertakers' services shall be laid prior to the commencement of any works of construction on the said access way; thereafter these works of construction shall proceed in such a manner as to ensure that each of such dwelling units, before it is occupied, shall be served by a properly consolidated and surfaced means of access between the dwelling and the existing highway. The final finished suxface of the access way shall be laid within three months of the completion of all dwelling units obtarn'ing access therefrom or within any such extended period as may be agreed. by the Authority.

10. A 2.1 metre x 2.1 metre pedestrian visibility splay, relative to back of footway/highway, should be provided on both sides of all vehicular accesses and no obstruction above 6oo mm in height should be permitted within the area of the splays.

11. \Qhere the surface finish of private drives are intended to remain in unbound materials the first six metres, as measured from the back of the highway, should be treated with an approved surface dressing to avoid the displacement of loose material onto the highway.

3

000536 REPORT:

This item is covered by the report to Item 1 immediately preceding.

3. P.00/096/84 GREAT WAJCEIRI&G.

SIiOEB1IRY NURSERY, WAKSRINU ROAD, GREAT WAKEIRING, ESSEX.

Erection of single storey nursery building. Tradera Garden Centre c/o Peter Dalton—Golding, MR.PPI, MAIDO, 19]BIM, 6, Southfield Close, Radleigh, Essex.

RECONNENDATION; APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 6 — A scheme of landsoaping to be approved.

3. Std.. Cond. 10 — Details of screening to be approved.

4. Std. Corid.. 33 — Car parked spaces to be marked on parking area. 5. The manufacture of conorete garden products shall only take place within the area hatched green on the revised application drawing returned herewith.

6. The manufacture of ooncrete garden products shall be ancillary to Traders Garden Centre only and there is to be no other manufsntuxing use, including any other uses within Classes 111 and 1V of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1972, on any part of the application site.

7. ill access to the site shall be gained via the existing access onto Wakering Road.

8. The retail sales area shall be restricted to the refurbished glass— house coloured yellow on the plan returned herewith.

9. There shall be no sub—division of the said. land by way of sale or the creation of any business tenancy separate to that of the present applicants Tradem Garden Centre.

10. A schedule of goods to be displayed and sold on the said land shall be submitted to the local planning authority prior to commencement of the development and no sales or display of any items goods or merchandise not contained on the said schedule shall take place on the application site.

11. The land fronting Poynters Lane, coloured blue shall remain open1. in character and no structures or buildings are to be erected oq\\ this area. 4 . 000337 REPORT:

Members may recall that a joint report of the Director of Legal Services and the Director of Town Planning was presented to this Committee on 6th October, 1983, in which details of the recent history of the site were outlined and recommendations put forward. Since that report, circum— stanoes have changed such that the present applicants are now seeking to develop their operations by aoq,inring the sites to the north and to the south of the, site known as Traders Garden Centre.

As members may recall, the main difficulties arising in 1983 were that a garden centre, which was granted planning permission in 1976, had been subdivided to create four district planning units and that problems of intensification of use, parking and access were envisaged. In addition, there were a number of breaches of planning control and of a Legal Agreement reached under 552 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971. One of the four units, Sprinklers Garden Centre is the subject of a regularising application whiob has been delegated to the Director of Town Planning to determine subject to the satisfactory conclusion of a Legal Agreement.

The revised application currently before members, seeks to combine the remaining three planning units and to bring them under the single owner- ship and control of Traders Garden Centre.

The details s'ubmitted by the applicants involve the improvement of the existing access onto Wakering Road; the creation of fifty oar parking spaces plus five staff oar parking spaces; the landscaping of the front of the site adjoining the two residential properties fronting Wakenng Road; the refurbishment and use of one glasshouse for retail garden centre Bales; the manufacture of concrete garden products ancillary to Traders Garden Centre; the erection of a staff W.C. building and the erection of a boundary fence to physically divide the site from New House Pam to the west. There is to be no access from Poynters Lane and the area of land and glasshouses fronting Poynters Lane are to remain as growing areas only, not open to the public.

Consistent with previous applications on the site, the Director of Towa Planning recommends that if members are minded to grant approval to this scheme, it should be subject to the above conditions, and be accompanied by a Section 52 Legal Agreement. The Director of Health and Housing and the County Surveyor have been re—consulted and any comments or recommended conditions will be reported verbally at the Planning Services Meeting on 26th April, 1984.

4. ROC/03l/84 RAYLEIGH.

'GLENNOUNT' WARWICK ROAD, RA?LEIGH, ESSEX.

Outline application to erect two detached houses and garages.

Haralan Property Co. Ltd., c/c John H. Williams, Estate House, 377, Rayleigh fload, Fastwood, Leigh on Sea, Essex.

5 000538 Plot 1.

Frontage: to Kent Way 12.19m.(40'); Plot size overall 31.48 x 18.89m. (ioo' x 62'); Density: 18.35 d.p.h.a.(7.5 d.p.a.)

Plot 2.

Frontage: l8.89m(62'); Depth: 25.90m(85').

RIIXJOMMLNDAflON: APPROVAL, SUBJDJ T TO:

1. Std. Cond. 1A — Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. Std. Cond.. 4 — Hedgerows to be retained.

4. Std1 Cond. 27B — Provision within curtilage of site for garage or garage space. 5. Std. Cond. 35 — Brick wall to be erected to front boundary.

BEPORT:

This application seeks to demolish the existing bungalow and to erect two houses, one fronting Warwick Road, and the other Kent Way.

Provision for access to the site of Glenmount from Warwick Road was taken into account when the site opposite Glenmount was favourable considered by the Committee. The application plan clearly shows the relationship between the proposed development and the surrounding housing, both exist- ing end proposed.

Objections to the development have been received from the following residents:—

Mr. .Aleman — 44, Lancaster Road.

Mr. L. Clemie — 46, Lancaster Road.

Mr. E.J. Davison — 46A Lancaster Road.

Mr. Bradley — 2, Gloucester Avenue.

Mr. A.J. Harris - 14, Kent Way.

Mr. E.W. Limage - 12, Kent Way.

The objections received can be split into two groups:—

House fronting Kent Way

(i) Out of keeping with the existing development, being sqt at en angle. 6. . (ii) Backland development.

(iii) Would result in the loss of mature trees.

(iv) Would result in over—looking and loss of privacy.

Rouse fronting Warwick Road,

(i) Would result in the loss of mature trees.

(ii) Would create additional hazards to pedestrians from cars crossing Lancaster Road,

No objections are raised by B. Tillingham of "The Warrent', Warwick Road, (adjoining the site in Warwick Road).

The whole of the application site lies within an area zoned for residential purposes on the County Development Plan. hulst I appreciate the level of objections raised against these proposals, the main objections relate to the house fronting onto Kent Way.

In submitting the application, the agent has stated that:—

"The house and garage on plot no.1, have been sited with the object of attempting to provide a visual 'closing off' at the end of Kent Way, whilst avoiding as far as possible any overlooking of the surrounding properties. I shall, of oourse, be willing to discuss any alternative proposals for the re—siting of this dwelling if thought necessary."

I have considered the possible resiting of the house on Plot 1, but feel that the location shown is the best that can be achieved bearing in mind the adjoining development and that the site is traversed by a large public sewer. The house will front directly onto Kent Way, although at an oblique angle and, therefore, oannct be regarded as backland or tandem development. The site area of each plot will be as great, if not greater than many of the houses in the immediate vicinity.

The design and siting of the house on Plot 1 will of course, be controlled when details are submitted to prevent overlooking and loss of privacy to adjoining residents. At present (i) a distance of 30.48m — 39.62m (100' — 130') exists between the rear of the house on Plot 1 and Nos 42, 44 and 46 Lancaster Road (ii) no side windows are envisaged (iii) a distance of 19.Blm — 24.38m (65' — so') exists between the front wall of Plot 1 and the front of 14 Kent Way (iv) a high hedgerow exists along part of the eastern bcundary and along the southern boundary of the site and (v) a l.Sm (6') screen fencing exists along the western boundary of the site.

No trees within the site are the subject of a tree preservation order, and to serve such an order would prohibit any development of the site for new housing. A large Oak tree is proposed to be removed from the frontage of Plot 2. However, a similar sized tree immediately adjoinp fl the site at the rear of 14, Kent Way. 7

0Q05410 No objections are raised to the proposals by the Anglian Water Authority I and the County Surveyor. I have required the retention of the existing hedgerow and hedgerow trees by Condition 3.

On balance, I consider that the development of this site is acceptable and would help complete the existing development in this vicinity.

5. ROC/O5O/84 RAYLEIGH

MN]) NORTH SIDE 0P VANDERBILT AVIIIUE, RAWEIETH, RAYLEIGH, ESSEX.

Erect three loose boxes and a tack room. J. Meredith c/o John Cotton, 185, London Road, Southend on Sea, Essex.

Area of land: 1.036 hectares.

EEC OMtvLENDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. This permission shaU. entire for the benefit of the applicant and his immediate family only, and for any future owner of the application site. 3. No more than three horses shall be kept or accommodated on the land, and all such horses shall belong to the applicant or owner of the application site. 4. No gymkhanas or other riding events involving any horses other than. those permitted by this permission shall take place on the site. 5. Before the stables are first used, a suitable barrier fence shall be erected around the site to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority to prevent damage to the existing hedgerows and trees surrounding the site, and to contain the horses within the site.

6. The existing trees and hedgerows around the site and within the application site shall be retained, and shall be protected from damage by the horses in accordance with the provisions of Condition No. 5. 7. This permission conveys no approval to the existing uxmuthorised structures on the site, which shall be taken down and removed from the site within sixty days from the date of this permission, or before the stables hereby permitted are first used, whichever is thqoner. 8 . 000541 8. A suitable means of disposal of wash—don effluent from the stables shall be submitted to, approved by, and constructed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority before the stables hereby approved are first used.

9. Before the stables hereby approved are first used, the area shown on the submitted plans, as revised by this permission, for the parking and turning of vehicles within the site shall be laid out and hard-surfaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

10. Notwithstanding the details shown on the submitted plans, the stables shall be sited no closer thaI). 180 feet from the easternmost boundary of the site, in the position marked green on the plan returned herewith.

I PEPOII!I!: I

The application, when first submitted, sought planning permission for six stables and two ancillary store buildings. Such development, however, was considered to be excessive in the light of Council policies, and the most recent plans submitted indicate two buildings, each 7.85 metres by 3.6 metres (25'6" x ll'lO"), one building containing two stables, and the other building containing one stable and a hay/tack store.

Thus, this application is in respeot of three stables on 1.036 hectares (2.56 acres). The Council's policy requires that 1.50 hectares (3.75 acres) is available for three stables, and there is, therefore, a shortfall in land of 0.81 acres for three stables.

In making a recommendation on this application, there was a need to take into consideration several points to be weighed against a refusal on the grounds of en excess of stables an relation to the amount of land normally required by the Council's Horseriding policy.

One consideration is that the site is well removed from the main road, and that it nay be difficult to make out a good case on appeal to show that this small shortfall in lend, and one extra stable would be more detrimental to the Metropolitan Green Belt than three stables.

A second consideration is that the applicant has already erected a most • unsightly stable structure on the land, constructed of corrugated iron. This structure is of course imauthorised, and I axe sure that Members would wish to see that speedy enforcement action is instituted.

However, the applicant has verbally promised to remove this structure as soon as it is possible to erect proper stables, which he wishes to do immediately planning permission is forthcoming.

The applicant recently sited a caravan on the site, but removed it immediately following the advice of my departments' Planning Officer that planning permission was required, but would be unlikely to be forthcoming.

The condition imposed regarding removal of other structures should be implemented within the immediate future, according to the applicant,

9

oOO42 who has also verbally agreed to the prompt removal of the unauthorised stables without the need for enforcement proceedings, and has also indicated his willingness to enter into a Legal Agreement on the land.

The Director of Health and Housing considers that the proposed stables should be sited on the west boundary to prevent possible nuisance, and the occupiers of Relianoe Farm would prefer that the stables are erected as far as possible from their dwelling.

In. these circumstances, it does not seem unreasonable to impose a condition requiring the stables to be sited close to the western boundary, involving re—siting them some 70 feet further west.

If planning permission is granted subject to the oonditions suggested, and a Legal Agreement being concluded, the existence of such a permission is unlikely to 3eopardise, in the least, any future case the Local lazining Authority may find it necessary to fight in an enforcement situation, and it is more likely to result in a satisfactory form of development on the site.

If planning permission is refused, then perhaps Members would indicate tether they wish enforcement proceedings to be instituted against the unauthorised structure on the site at present.

6. ROC/l03/84 RAYLEIGH

RAYLEIGH NETHODIST CHURCH, EASTWOOJ) ROLl), RAYLEIGH, ESSEX.

Add extension to classroom block and convert room for toilet facilities.

Rayleigh Methodist Church 0/0 G.E. Cooper, 13, Trinity Road, Rayleigh, E Essex.

Floor Area: 200 sq. ft.

EEC 0NMDATI0N: APPROVAILL_SUBJECT TO: 1. Std. Ccnd. 3 — Commence in. 5 years. 2. Std. Ccnd. 9 — Materials to match existing.

3. The uses to be carried out within the additional floorspace hereby approved shall fall within Class Xlll of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1972.

4. No activities shall be carried on between 11.00 p.m. and within the additional floorspace hereby approved.

10 . 000343 The existing flat roof extension approved under application no. ROC/317/70 has been used. for a variety of purposes, all of which have been parish related such as Committee Meetings, Junior Youth Club etc. over the last twelve years. The proposal compensates for the lost floorspace provided for the new indoor toilet, and is to be used to provide a creche facility.

Local residnt have been advised of the proposal and no objections received so long as the current uses are not exceeded and the trees around the site retained. The use of the buil&thg is controlled by Conditions 3 and 4 and no trees are affected by the proposal.

7. ROC/l04/84 RULLBBIDGE

8, MAYFIELD AVEflJE, WJILBFIBGE, ESSEX.

Erect two detached houses with integral garages.

Mr. E. Randolph c/c G.B. Spencer Ltd., 2, Market Square Chambers, Rochfcrd, Essex.

Frontage:l8.3m(60t); Depth:45.7m(150'); Floor .Area:2xl69.5m2(1824ft2)

REQONNDATI0N; APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Ccnd. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. Std. Cond. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

3. Std. Cond. l2A — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling. 4. Std. Ccnd. 14 — l.8m(6') high fencing to be erected. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3, Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Orders 1977 to 1981, there shall be no obstruction to visibility above a height of 600mm within the sight splays hatched blue on the plan No. 4240 returned herewith.

6. Std. Ccnd. 34 — Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

11

uoo544 REPORT;

The application site is presently occupied by a detached bungalow. The properties to the east were built as bungalows, although that bungalow immediately adjoining now has dormer additions. To the west the site adjoins the rear gardens of houses fronting Ferry Road.

Although the properties in this part of the road are mostly bungalows, there are many houses elsewhere in the road, and the proposal is not unnaceptable

The occupirs of No. 10 Nayfield Avenue and 138 Ferry Road have no oboections to the proposal.

8. ROC/135/84 ROCRPORD.

LAND ADJOINING 199, SOUTHRiD ROAD, ROORFORD, ESSEX.

Outline application to erect one detached house.

R.H. Pacey & P.R. Curry c/o R.E. Faoey & Lang, 56, West Street, Rochford, Essex.

Frontage:l4m; Depth:45m; Density:l7d.ha. (7d.a.)

RECONMENDATION: APPROVAL SUBJEXJT TO:

1. Std. Cond. IA - Reserved matters of the building to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. Std. Cond. 27A — Provision within curtilage of site for garage or garage space.

4. The gateway for vehicular access shall be sited and recessed with I sight splays in accordanoe with details to be agreed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority prior to the sub- mission of the reserved matters referred to above.

5. The reserved matters referred to above shall include plans showing provision within the site to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for vehicles to turn to enable them to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

REPORT:

The site lies towards the southern end of Southend Road close to\j Warners Bridge. 1 12 I 000545 The site has a residential notation on the Development Plan and, lies within a ribbon of mixed housing development. The proposal is considered to be appropriate to this mull site.

9. R00/162/84 HOOICLEY

110MB] EARN, 46, HIGH ROAD, HOCKLFJY, ESSEX.

Demolish six existing stables and rebuild six replacement stables.

Valley Forge 0/0 B.T. Byford, 13, High Road, Rayleigh, Essex.

Total area of farm:l35acres.

BE0ONMEDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJBCT 110:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. The Stables shall not be used as a Riding School.

3. The stables shall only be used in association with the land currently shown on the submitted plans as Rome Farm. The stables shall not be used for any purposes independent of the farm without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

BEPORT:

The proposal involves the straight replacement of six stables with six units of similar size in the same location. The site has been used as a small livery yard since 1954. There is ample parking space for owners vehicles, and there are good facilities for grazing and riding etc. at Home Pam which extends to some 135 acres.

10. ROO/828/83 HOCKLEY

LAND BEAR OP 43-49 S0TJTKF1ID ROAD, ROCKLEY.

Outline application to erect two detached houses and garage with private drive access.

13 004546 lir. LW. Francis, 0/0 John H. Williams, Estate House, 377, Rayleigh Road, Eastwood, Leigh on Sea, Essex.

Plot 1

Frontage:20m(65'7"); Depth:Ave.43.Om(141'O")

Plot 2.

Frontage:20.5m(6713t1); Depth:29.5m(96t9)

EEC ONMEftWAPION: APPROVAL SuBJECt TO:

1. Std. Cond lÀ — Reserved matters to be approved.

2. Std. Cond. 2 — Commence in 5 years (or 2 years).

3. The trees, the subject of TPO No. 7/78 along the southern boundary of the site shall be protected by chestnut railing fencing for the duration of the construction period at a distance equivalent to not less than the spread from the trunk. No materials shall be stored or buildings erected inside these fences; no changes in ground level shall be made within the spread of the tree without the previous written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 4. No development shall take place within lOm (33') of the trunk of any preserved tree. 5. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved.

6. Std. Cond. 29 — Dwelling not to be enlarged or altered without prior approval. 7. Std. Cond. 10 — Details of screening to be approved. 8. The permission conveys no agreement to the disposition or plan form of the proposed dwellings.

REPORT: This application has been submitted in a composite form with the following two items on the schedule, ROC/78/84 and ROC/79/84. Planning permisSion was granted on 13th October, 1981, to erect five detached house and to change the use of the existing warehouse buildings to office use, App1ioation No's aoo/eos/so arid ROC/662/8O. These applications were each subject to a legal agreement requiring:— Ci) the cessation of the warehouse use (ii) prior to the construction of the residential development, 14 . that the existing access to Southend Road be permanently closed, and all access be taken from the proposed culs—. de—sac to serve both the residential and office use.

Both permissions have been partially implemented now with one dwelling constructed on the frontage of the site, and. the main two storey warehouse in use for office purposes. However, the applicant now wishes:—

(i) to reduce the number of dwelling houses at the rear of the site from four to two;

(ii) to construct a private drive rather than a culs—de--sao to serve the housing;

(iii) to retain and widen the existing access serving the office use directly from Southend Road;

(iv) to re—position the garage door to the recently constructed house and to provide parking and turning facilities on the frontage of the site.

In support of the proposals, the applicant has stated that he would be willing to enter into a new or amended legal agreement, and to revoke the partially implemented planning permission for four houses at the rear.

Whilst I am not entirely satisfied with the siting and plan form of the housing on this outline application, I consider that the principle of the development would be preferable to the construction of four smaller residential units on the site.

No objections are raised to the revised combined proposals by the County Surveyor, and Director of Health and Housing.

To ensure the proper planning of these three sites, I recommend that further legal agreements be entered into with the appliosnt to prevent the separate implementation of any planning permission granted and/or the further implementation of the planning permission for four houses at the rear (Application No. ROC/885/80).

Condition 1 on Application No's ROC/78/64 and ROC/79/54 require works to be carried out within three months of the date of the permission, as the existing development breaches planning conditions imposed on the earlier application referred to in my report.

11. ROC/078/84 HOCK[JEY

45, MID 47, SOU1flTh ROAD, HOCKILEY.

15 000548 V F - 1J I t7pr rrrr

Revised access arrangements. Extensionof car park area for 9 cars and new dwarf brick wall to frontage. Nessrs. P. Copping Limited, o/o John H. Williams, Estate House, 377, Rayleigh Road, Eastwood, Leigh on Sea, Essex.

EEC ONNLbThATION: APPROVAL , SUBJECT TO:

1. The existing access shall be widened to 5.5m(lS') and shall be provided with an Sin (265") crossing within three months of the date of this permission.

2. The car park shall be surfaced within six months of the date of this permission. Details of the surfacing for the proposed car park shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development. 3. Std. Cond, 5 — A soheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved.

4. The proposed 600mm brick boundary wall shall be erected within six months of the date of this pemission.

RZPOR1J2:

Please see the report attached to Application No. ROC/82a/83, which is the preceding Item (10) on this schedule.

12. ROC/079/84 HOCKLEY

43, SOUDTh4D ROAD, HOCKLEY.

Revised access arrangements to existing garage, new garage door and dwarf brick wall to frontage.

Mr. O.K. Walker, o/o John H. Williams, Estate House, 377, Rayleigh Road, Eastwood, Leigh on Sea, Essex.

RECO1PtTDATION: APPROVAL, S1JBJBK)TTO: 1. The proposed alterations to the garage; access; car parking and turning area; and dwarf brick shall be completed within three months of the date of this permission.

2. Std. Cond. 5 — A. scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be apwod. 16

009543 3. Details of the surfacing of the proposed oar parking and turning area shall be submitted to and. agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development.

REPORT;

Please see the report attached to Applioation No's 1100/828/83, and 1100/078/84, the preceding items (io arid ii) on this schedule.

13. R0C/145/84 RAYLKL(

60-62, HIGH STEERP, RAYLEIGH, ESSEX.

Erect internally illuminated 2 asois sign.

Vernon Collard, 0/0 R.B. Sign Services (U.K.) Ltd., 12, Local Board Road, Watford, Herts.

B0Nt'ThINDAfl0N: RMtIJSAL, FOR T FOLLOWING REASONS:

1. The proposed sign by reason of its size, colour and method of illumination would produce an unduly dominant and. visually obtrusive feature in the street scene at this point in the Rayleigh Conservation Area to the detriment of its character and appearance.

2. The proposed illuminated fascia sign would result in an excessive and confusing display of advertising material on the face of this building, to the detriment of the visual quality of this part of the Rayleigh Conservation Area.

REPORT;

The proposed sign would unduly clutter the front of the building (60/62 High Street, Rayleigh). There have been objections from the County Planner and the Rayleigh Civic Society. No comments have been received from the County Surveyor to date.

14. ROC/165/84 HULLBRIDGE

58, GRASI(ERE AVUE, HULLBBIBGE, ESSEX.

17 Erect detaohed house with double integral garage.

Hecray Co., Ltd., c/c LII. Russell, 20 Faibro Creso., Had.leigh, Benfleet, Essex.

Prontage:l5.8m(52'); Depth:45m(l47'); floor Area:232m2(2503'2)

EECONNENDA5IION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. l2A — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 1 of the Town and Comatry Planting General Development Orders 1977 to 1981, there shall be no obstruction to visibility above a height of 600mm within the sight splays hatched blue on the plan returned herewith.

REPORT:

There is a house to either side of the application site, which is presently occupied by a detached bungalow, and the proposed dwelling would share some features in common with both of the adJoining properties. The occupier of No. 34 Grasmere Avenue has no objections to the proposal, and at the time of writing, no comments have been received from the other adjoining resident.

15. ROC/2l2/84 R1]ILBRIDGE UtTh (PLOT 4) THE AVENUE, HULIERIDGE I

Erect three detached houses with integral garages. Cliff Keeble Builders Ltd., c/o Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 305, London Road, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex. Prontae:3O.4m(l0O'); Depth:48.7m(160'); floor Arsa:l7om2eaoh (1834' )

EEC ONMEThATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be apoed.

18 • OUOt5I 3. Std. Cord. 8 — Submit materials schedule.

4. Std. Cond 12k — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

5. Std. Cond. 14 — l.Sm(6') high fencing, to be erected.

6. Std. Cond. 34 -. Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

7. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning General Development Orders 1977 to 1981, no enlargement of the dwellings hereby approved shall take plaoe between the walls indicated in green on the plans No. 4866:84 returned herewith, and the front of the semi—integral garages without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

RRPOIIT:

The application site, together with land to the south which has a frontage to both The Avenue and Aifreda Avenue, was the subject of any approved application (RoC/663/Bl) granted permission in January 1982 for nine detached properties with six fronting The Avenue and three fronting Alfreda Avenue. Both the current site and this other adjoining land. is at presently partially cleared scntbland. Members may also recall that the site with additional land to the south fronting The A'venue only, was the subject of a refused application for three blocks of flats, (R0C/569/82).

The three units now proposed are of an acceptable desigti, each with lipped roofs, semi—integral garages and with projecting gables to the front — tile hung in the case of the central property and with mock Tud.cr finish on the flanking properties.

The site is poorly marked on the ground, but it would appear that the three units now proposed correspond only approximately to the position of the three northernmost properties approved under RO0/663/8l being on plot widths of iOn (33') as opposed to 9m (30') of the earlier and still valid permission — a total frontage of 30m (99') as opposed to 27m (90'), with the result that should this application, if approved, be implemented before the earlier one, then three units can no longer be accommodated on the remaining frontage to the south in the manner shown by the previous permission due to its reduced width (and vice versa). However, at 29.5m (so'), this remaining frontage is still sufficient in principle to accommodate one detached property and a pair of semi— detached properties, and approval of this application should in no way prejudice the successful development of the whole of The Avenue on this western side.

19

000352 16. Roc/214/04 HUILBEIDGE

30/31 CEEE}CVIJ AVENUE, BIILIIBPIDGE, ESSEX.

Erect two detached houses with integral garages.

Boardworth Building Co., c/o Ron Hudson Designs Ltd., 305, London Road, Hadleigh, Benfleet, Essex.

rontap:18.3m(6O'); Depth:38m(l25'); floor Area:162m2 each (1742' )

EEC0Mf(E2tDATION: APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO:

1. Std. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years.

2. Std. Cond. 5 — A scheme of tree and/or shrub planting to be approved.

3. Std. Cond.. 12A — Garage to be incidental to enjoyment of dwelling.

4. Std. Cond. 14 — l.8m (6') high fencing to be erected.

5. Std. Cond. 34 — Certain windows to be obscure glazed.

6. Std. Cond. 35 — A brick wall to be erected to front boundary.

DEPORT:

Planning permission was granted in September 1983 (RoC/516/83) for two detached houses on a site which differed slightly from that of the present application. Both the site and the adjoining land on both sides was until recently scru.blsnd, and this has now been cleared in part. The two properties proposed are different — one having a lipped roof, the other gabled — and. the latter having a mock tudor front. I am awaiting the comments of the Anglian Water Authority though I do not expect any objections.

ROC/77O/83 RAYLEIGH

l4A EAWEETH INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAWEEHH LAKE], RAYLEIGH, ESSEX.

Change use from residential to offices and storage accommodation.

T. Guam (Rayleigh) Ltd., c/c IV. & G. Sorrell, 40, Clarence Strt, Southend on Sea, Essex. 'Q ! \ 20 000533 floor Area;93 sq.m.(I000sq,.ft.)

DEC 0tTh1ENDATION; PRO V.41, SUBJECT TO;

1. SM. Cond. 3 — Commence in 5 years1

2. The property shall be used as offices and storage accommodation only an4 shall not be used. for any other purpose including any industrial use with Classes 111 and 1V of the Tcwn and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1972 without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

3. Provision shall be made for two oar parking spaces within the ourtilage of the site prior to the commencement of the proposed use.

4. No goods shall be stored or deposited on the open areas of the site.

REPOET:

This application involves a pair of buildings where the adjoining half is still in residential use. Because of this, the application has been held in abeyance pending knowledge of the future occupier and precise use to enure no detriment is caused to the adjoining residential occupier. The applicants agent has now confirmed that the accommodation is to be used as offices and storage only allied to Aliclad Sheet Metal Co. Ltd. who already conduct their industrial activities at Unit No. 13.

18. RCC/1C1/84 RCCBTORI)

'TEE BFEWFVE', 12, SOUTE STREET, ROCH$'ORD, ESSEK.

Internal alterations to kitchen, lounge and bathroom.

D.A. Alexander, 12, South Street, Rochford, Essex.

EEC OMMEIfDATION: APPROVAL, STIBJDJT TO:

1. Std. Corid. 3 — Commence in 5 years. 2. The roof shall be covered with natural

21 REPORT:

The building is not "listed", but is tuated within the Conservation Area. The proposal will for the most part improve and replace existing accommodation and dilapidated out-buildings at the rear. The proposal has been produced in conjunction with advice from the County Planner.

The Rochfcrd Parish Council have no objections to the proposal, and neither do the occupiers of the adjacent premises at 14, South Street.

19. ROC/885/83 RAYLEIGH

BAWBW.PH GARAGE, CHEffiSPOED ROAD, BAWftEflI.

Change use of existing garage to office reception. I

Kr. H. Bryant, c/o Reg Curd, 16, Cedar Hall Gardens, Thundersley, Benfleet, Essex.

Frontage;21.33m(iObOtI); ])eptb:91.44m(300'O")

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSAL, FOR ThE tLLO\WTG REASONS:

1. The proposal would deprive the dwelling of an existing domeetic garage • The Local Planning Authority require that a garage or garage space, in addition to a further space for a visitors' vehicle being provided within the curtilage of each dwelling. Such provision at present exists, and no suitable alternative location has been indicated for a replacement garage, which would result in domestic vehicles being parked within the forecourt of the application site, or on the highway, to the detriment of road, safety, and contrary to the policies of the Local Planning Authority. 2. The existence of a vehicle workshop and M.O.P. testing bay within the application site would not fail to encourage customers and staff to park their vehicles within the fcreoourt. No details have 1een submitted to indicate that adequate parking and turning facilities exist within the site, which will not conflict with similar facilities required for the domestic dwelling, and the restricted area of fore-t court contained within the application site would be likely to lead to confliction and confusion of parking and manoevering of vehicles within the forecourt, or reversing onto the A130 Chelmsford Road, to the detriment of the safety of other road users and h4hway safety of other road users and highway safety in general.

22 wa 000555 REPORT:

This domestic garage, formed in 1981 by converting and extending an existing kitchen extension, is attached to the southern flank wall of one of a pair of semi—detached chalets. This chalet, formerly known as .Ann's Pantry was, until 1975, used as a cafe on part of the ground floor, with living accommodation at the rear. At some time before 1973, the cafe was renamed 'The Good Companions Bungalowt, and by 1969, the cafe chalet and adjoining service station was owned by a Mr. P. Darton. Mr. Barton sought planning permission in 1973 to erect a large workshop in the vaoaiit space between the service station and the cafe, and permission was granted only after Mr. Barton bad entered into a legal agreement with the Essex County Council to discontinue the use of the cafe. The reason for this was related to the amount of extra traffic that would be created by the additional workshop facilities, loss of oar parking etc.

Mr. Barton's application for the workshop in 1973, certified that he was the owner of all the land containing the chalet, workshop and service station, and the application site included all this curtilage. Conse- quently, conditions were imposed on the consent requiring fencing etc. However, some of the fencing related to the original route of the new Battlesbridge bypass, and since the by-pass has been built in a different location, those particular conditions have no effect and have not, therefore, been complied with. kIter 1973, Mr. Barton submitted several applications for development within the site of the Good Companions Garage, which included the service station, workshop and bungalow. The applications included several exten- sions to the living accommodation contained within the chalet, the domestic garage the subject of this application, domestic stables, exten- sions to the workshop approved in 1973, and illuminated signs on various buildings within the site • One of the advertising signs related to consent to display the wording 'Eawreth Garage' to one of the buildings, viz, the above workshop, and consent was granted under the Town and County Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1969, in July 1979. This consent expires in July this year.

The name 'Rawreth Garage' was not considered to be of any particular significance since there was no reason why the whole application site, (which included the service station, workshop, and chalet) should not be renamed 'The Rawreth Garage'.

In 1982, Chevron Oil submitted a planning application, under ROC/237/82 for the redevelopment of the service station forecourt, certifying themselves as owner of that site. Such acquisitions of service stations by Oil Companies is not unusual, and. no change of use of land was applied for. The County Surveyor did not object to the proposal since the existing access onto Chelmsford Road remained unchanged. Planning permission was granted for the redevelopment on 25th June 1982.

The above application showed that Mr. Darton had disposed of part of the Good Companions site to Chevron Oil by 1982, but it also transpires that he disposed the remainder of the land to a Mr. Byrant, the pre eM

23 —

OOQ5SG applicant and owner who now seeks permission to use the domestic garage as an office in relation to a vehicle servicing business entirely separate from the adjoining service station, now tenanted.

Thus, two separate businesses now operate from he Good Companions site, for which planning pennission has not been granted. Correspondence has taken place between the applicant and. Chevron Oil and the Council on this matter, and further negotiations are under way to establish the legal position, but I am at present unconvinced that any established one exists for the operation of two planning units on the land. The County Surveyor recognises that both units have their own accesses onto Chelinsford Road, these existing in the days when Ann's Pantry was used as a cafe and the service station as a petrol filling station, and, therefore, raises no objection to the proposal to change the use of the domestic garage since no alterations to the existing access are contem— plated.

From a town planning point of view, there would be no objection to the separate workshop being used in conjunction with the adjoining service station sinoe it is fitted out as a modern N.0.'T. station. Similarly, there would be no objections to the chalet being used for purely residential occupation, particularly bearing in mind that the dwelling is at present provided with a domestic garage and turning facilities within the site.

However, the proposed change of use would deprive the dwelling of a garage, and since there is no suitable space for an alternative garage, domestic vehicles would be parked in the forecourt. In addition, now that the adjoining workshop is being used as a separate unit known as the Rawreth Garage, within the same curtilage as the dwelling, any available forecourt space would need to be used for the parking and turning of customers and staff vehioles, in addition to the domestic vehicles of the dwelling itself.

The forecourt appears to have an average depth of only 7.62 metres (25101*), and such parking arrangements are totally unsatisfactory for the reasons given, and it is recommended that the application be refused.

Members will be informed if any further action is contemplated regarding the apparent sub-division of the site, following investigation.

24

S !EIGA1I) PILMINING DECISIONS

I have decided the following applications in accordance with the policy of delegation and subject to conditions:—

PRO VAtS

ROC/l79/84 Acid single storey rear extension at 175, Conway Ave., Great Wakering, Essex - fir. Chambers.

ROC/108/84 Add. single storey front extension at 68, Orchard Avenue, Hockley — fit' & Mrs 5. Cooper.

ROC/lsl/84 Add porch to front and double garage to side of dwelling at 'Havering', Chapel Lane, Great Wakering, Essex - 3. Riobmond.

ROC/l87/84 Add. attached side oarport and alterations to existing front porch at Sla, Nelson Road, Rayleigh, Essex — G. Zanoletty.

ROC/l71/84 Erect two metre high boundary fence at 88, Lower Lambricks, Rayleigh, Essex - J.B. Malone.

ROC/l54/84 Add single storey side and rear extensions at 47, Daws Heath Road, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. Clark.

ROC/l91/84 Add bay window and porch to front of dwelling at 89, The Chase, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. N.H. Weltrowski.

ROC/130/84 Add single storey side extension at 93, Richmond Drive, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. P. Allen.

ROC/088/84 Add two storey side extension and carport to side, and front porch at 9, The Gattens, Rayleigh, Essex — Mr. Dayer.

ROC/08l/84 Add two storey side extension at 6, Goldeworthy Drive, Great Wakering, Essex - W.W.C. Tan.

ROC/089/84 Add single storey rear extension at 28, Gt. Easteni. Road, Hockley, Essex — Mrs. S.L. Seaney.

REFUSALS

ROC/139/84 Erect detached garage at 168, Conway Avenue, Great Wakering, Essex — Mr. N. EMen.

Reason: 1) Siting contrary to highway safety and minimum distance of 6m (20') normally required in front of garage for pa space clear of highway.

000558 I ,i,uu rip " S • I

S

S

DELEEITEI BUILDING _BEGULATQN$ DEKiISIONS

1k Th! SESSIQi.

S DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APPROVA

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

BR. 84/84 Site between 353—363, Little 1 detached dwelling Wakering Road, Wakering, Essex.

BR.84/125 3, Greenways, Rochford, Essex. Removal of chimney breast.

DR.84/149 F&irview & Homestead, 34 No. 3 and 4 Bed Houses. Hockley Rd., Rayleigh, Essex.

BR.84/115 68, Orchard Avenue, Jiockley, Front extension. Shower room. Essex.

BR .84/105 44, Cedar Drive, Hulibridge, Extension of front and rear dormers Essex. to provide additional bedroom and new bathroom.

BR.84/144 39, Ferndale Road, Rayleigh, Conversion of' garage to utility room Essex. and construction of new garage. . BR.84/13O 9, Station Road, Hockley, Extension to form dining room to rear. Essex.

BR. 83/78s'' 115, Southend Road, Rochford, Internal alterations. Essex.

BR.84/l0 5, Folly Lane, F{ockley, Essex. Rear dormer and loft room extension.

BR. 84/73 70, Weir Gardens, Rayleigh, Essex. Extension.

BR. 84/148 10, Willow Drive, Rayleigh, Demolish existing conservatory and Essex. garage and build extension.

BR.84/l32 2, Ash Way, Hockley, Essex. Rear extension.

BR. 84/72 37, Greensward Lane, Hockley, Two storey extension. Essex. S BR. 84/93 14, Monksford Drive, Kitchen/Diner extension. Hullbridge, Essex.

BR. 84/9A. 51 Windermere Avenue,Htbridge, Dining Addition & Dormer additions &, carport.

BR. 84/123 Site of B Mayfield Avenue, Proposed 2 Houses. Huflbridge.

BR. 84/13.6 16 Cheapside West, Rayleigh. Garage (attached). BR. 84/48k 30 Globe Drive, Rayleigh. Side single atorey extension. BR. 83/1100k 106—108 High Street, Rayleigh Change use of first floor Pool Hall. . 000589 DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

BR. 83/985 64 Keswick Avenue,Hullbridge Replacement of roof and conversion of same into Granny flat and Carport.

BR. 84/17 1 "Delaford", Lower Road, Proposed additions. Hockley.

BR. 84/17i 1 Nount Avenue, Hockley. Proposed loftrooma.

BR. 84/197 4 ¶Jlowmfield Road, Roohford. Proposed Additions.

BR.84/l0( 166 High Street,Gt.Wakering. Proposed new roof tiles.

BR. 84/187 112 High Street,Gt.Wakering Proposed new roof tiles.

BR. 84/221 2 Well House Cottages, Side single storey extension and Apton Hall Lane, Oenewdon. conservatory extension.

1311. 84/2l 10 Ferry Road, Htfllbridge. Partial underpinning to existing foundations.

BR. 84/l7 7 Victoria Road, Rayleigh. Carport.

BR. 84/l2 23 Belvedere Avenue,Hockley. Proposed extension for lounge and 2 bedrooms.

BR. 84/18 56 Kimberley Road, Little Th suite shower room. Wakering. BR. 84/19' 5 Ravenawood Chase,Roohford. New W.C. to existing bathroom.

BR. 84/l7 5 Holt Farm Way, Rochford. Cavity Wall Insulation.

BR. 84/20 158 Lower Road, Hullbridge. Cavity Wall Insulation. BR. 04/192 12 Teignmouth Drive,Rayleigh. Cavity Wall Insulation.

• BR. 84/143 89 The Chase, Rayleigh. Proposed new bay and porch to front elevation.

BR.84/133 8 Manor Close, Rayleigh. Demolish and rebuild existing garage.

BR.84/140 31 Do'wnhall Close, Rayleigh. Rear Exteneion.

BR. 04/27A 76 Csnewdon View Road, Single storey rear extension and rooms Ashingdon. in roof space.

BL83/120 A Hal]. Green, London Road, Side extension & alterations. Rawret.

BR. 83/867 65 Sutton Court Drive, Carport. Rochford.

GDD61 DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS APP ROVA LSJO PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION I BR. 84/102A 6 The Lartons, Rochford. Add porch, extension to Ion kitchen! diner, and en suite to bedroom.

BR. 83/904k 38 The Walk, RtiLlbridge. Two storey detached house.

BR. 83/lO83 Adj.69 Seaview Drive, Residential development, Phase 1 — 7 Ot. Wakering. Houses.

BR. 84/46 5 Silverdale, Rayleigh. Kitchen extension, utility room. New internal partition & Opening.

BR. 83/ll2 Ashingdon Hall, Church Road, Alterations and change of use. Ashingdon.

BR. 84/90A 38 Leslie Road, Rayleigh. Kitchen extension. S

.

S OOO5& l'I! 7Ye?.Ir! !rw7 ''ref r . ••

DELEGATED BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ZZOEJECTI0NS

PLAN NO. ADDRESS DESCRIPTION

BR. 84/89 14 Nevecn Road, Rayleigh. Two storey extension & porch extension.

BR. 84/90 38 Leslie Road, Rayleigh. Kitchen extension.

BR. 84/91 12 South Street, Roohford. Kitchen/Lounge extension c% bathroom.

BR. 84/9 2 2 M.ine Crescent, Rayleigh. Lounge extension & carport.

BR. 84/98 31. Oak Road, Roohford. ])emolish carport end store and erect garage and extension td first floor.

BR. 84/1 07 Abbeyville, The Chase,Ashingdon Th'ont and rear additions.

BR. 84/111 Bluebell Lodge, Rayleigh Downs Brect a Pool Chalet. Road, Rayleigh. • 87 Grove Road, Rayleigh. Rtect 3 detached houses. BR. 54/102 6 The Laxtons, Rochford. Add porch, extension to foit kitohen/ diner and en suite to bedroom.

BR. 84/103 448 Crown Hill, Rayleigh. Rxtension.

BR. 84/106 220 Hockley Road, Rayleigh. Single storey extension.

BR. 84/118 Windrush, Riliview Road, Underpinning and repairs. Rayleigh.

BR. 84/121 9 The Gattens, Rayleigh. 2 storey side extension and carport.

BR. 84/126 Go Keswick Avenue, llullbridge. &tension to lounge and kitchen.

BR. 84/1 27 Preight Rouse, Bradley Way, Internal alterations to existing Rochford. building. • 5 Seaview flrive,Gt. Wakering. Extension to lounge and kitchen. - BR.84/133 S XLIII Lane, Hawkwell. Dormers in roof.,

BR. 84/1 34 22 York Road, Ashingdon. 2 x 4 bedroom Houses and garages.

- BR.64/l36 78 Hullbridge Road, Rayleigh. Proposed alterations end extension.

BR84/137 3 Sheridan Close, Rayleigh. Kitchen extension single storey.

BR. 84/141 34 Uplands Road, Hawlcwell. Extension to garage end internal alteration to dining area.